Midrash – Smoking a Ziggurat

January 31, 2021January 31, 2021

Faulty Old Testament Texts and the New Testament

The New Testament cites the Old Testament on its every page. My critical edition of the Greek New Testament has an appendix. In it, there are over thirty pages taking note of all of these citations and allusions. But biblical researchers who believe that the Bible is divinely inspired eventually run into a problem. Many of these citations do not strictly follow their Old Testament sources. Sometimes it is apparent that they are using a free translation of their own. At other times they engage in a sort of midrash that produces a composite text from numerous sources. But there are instances where the authors seem to use a text that is deficient in terms of textual criticism. Could the New Testament authors actually have quoted faulty Old Testament texts?

A Faulty Old Testament Text

I follow Drew Longacre’s good work over at OTTC: A Blog for Old Testament Textual Criticism. Several years ago he posted a really nice paper there on Deuteronomy 32:35-37. He makes a strong argument for the background of the Septuagint’s translation of these verses, especially in verse 35. The Revised Standard Version, like almost every other translation, follows the standard, Masoretic Hebrew text:

³⁵Vengeance is mine, and recompense,
for the time when their foot shall slip;
for the day of their calamity is at hand,
and their doom comes swiftly.
Deuteronomy 32:35, RSV

Longacre, for all sorts of reasons, argues that the Greek Septuagint is probably closer to the original sense of the Hebrew:

In the day of vengeance I will recompense, whensoever their foot shall be tripped up; for the day of their destruction is near to them, and the judgments at hand are close upon you.
Deuteronomy 32:35, from the Sir Lancelot Brenton translation of the Septuagint.

There are a few differences, but I’ve put the important ones for our purposes here in bold.

Longacre’s strongest argument for preferring the Septuagint here is that it offers a tighter, Hebraic parallelism than the Masoretic text. If you go back and read both of the versions above, I think that you will quickly see what he is talking about. In the Hebrew text, it is really simple to account for the shift from “in the day of vengeance” to “vengeance is mine.” It is the difference of only a few letters. And it makes more sense for the letters to fall away and render the current Masoretic text than for a scribe to supply more letters in a pre-Septuagint Hebrew text.

Deuteronomy 32:35 in the New Testament

But this is just where we have our problem. Usually, when the New Testament cites the Old, it does so with the Septuagint. But in the two places where the New Testament quotes Deuteronomy 32:35, it does not. The first is Romans 12:19, where Paul writes,

Beloved, never avenge yourselves, but leave it to the wrath of God; for it is written, “Vengeance is mine, I will repay, says the Lord.”

The other is Hebrews 10:30:

We know him who said, “Vengeance is mine, I will repay.”

The Implications: Faulty Old Testament Texts in the New Testament

There are several things that are interesting about these two verses. First of all, they demonstrate that the proto-Masoretic text at Deuteronomy 32 had already in the pre-Christian period crystallized into the text-form that rabbinic Judaism preserved into modern times. (When you consider that the space between these citations and the oldest Torah manuscript is nearly 1000 years, that’s pretty significant). This also means that many of the faulty Old Testament texts also become an integral part of this manuscript family.

Secondly, apparently both Paul and the author of Hebrews intentionally chose a text that was closer to the proto-Masoretic text than the Septuagint. This is significant because both of these books have numerous citations from the Septuagint. But they either re-translated Deuteronomy 32:35, or made use of another Greek translation that was closer to the proto-Masoretic text with which they were familiar.

And this is the big problem. If scribes corrupted the proto-Masoretic text of Deuteronomy 32:35, then isn’t the fact that these New Testament authors directly cite it a mark against the divine inspiration of the texts they are composing? Isn’t this a manifest error in the Bible? Could inspired authors really cite faulty Old Testament texts?

Should It Bother Us that the New Testament Cites Faulty Old Testament Texts?

This is the sort of thing that brought on my faith crisis so many years ago. But today, this doesn’t really bother me. I do think that this is probably a corruption in the proto-Masoretic manuscript family, and that these New Testament authors did perpetuate this corruption in their citations of Deuteronomy 32:35. Paul was a brilliant rhetorician. He wasn’t a textual critic.

But I think we should take this one step further. I would argue that the quoting of this manuscript error in the New Testament also took place under the providential inspiration of the Holy Spirit, just as everything else that the biblical authors and editors wrote.

Perhaps I feel this way because I have been reading too much midrash. The rabbinic sages were aware of textual irregularities in their biblical manuscripts, and instead of worrying so much about how this could happen to their sacred texts, they considered that God allowed this as part of His plan. So, the scribal mistakes are inspired, too.

Midrash Provides a Way Out

A classic example is 1 Samuel 13:1. “Saul was . . . years old when he began to reign.” That’s how the RSV renders the faulty Hebrew text. But in the Hebrew, it literally seems to say that Saul was one year old when he became king. That’s obviously not the case. Saul’s age has disappeared from the text.

Enter midrash. In Yoma 22b of the Babylonian Talmud, there is a delightful explanation for this scribal error.

It is written: “Saul was one year old when he began to reign” (1 Samuel 13:1), which cannot be understood literally, as Saul was appointed king when he was a young man. Rav Huna said: The verse means that when he began to reign he was like a one-year–old, in that he had never tasted the taste of sin but was wholly innocent and upright.

So, the Talmud provides a spiritual explanation for the obvious fault in the manuscripts. Saul was not literally a year old, but he was innocent of sin like babies are.

The Talmud’s Response to Midrashic Skeptics

Now, you might just be skeptical about the validity of this interpretation, especially if you have studied the historical-critical exegetical methods of our day. And if that is the case, you’re in good company. Rav Naḥman bar Yitzḥak felt just the same as you. In fact, this was his response: “You could just as well say that he was like a one-year-old in that he was always filthy with mud and excrement.” But be careful before you reject the interpretations of the rabbis of old! Just look at what happened to poor Rav Naḥman after he said this:

Rav Naḥman was shown a frightful dream that night, and he understood it as a punishment for having disparaged Saul. He said: I humbly submit myself to you, O bones of Saul, son of Kish, and beg your forgiveness. But once again he was shown a frightful dream, and he understood that he had not shown enough deference in his first apology. He therefore said this time: I humbly submit myself to you, O bones of Saul, son of Kish, king of Israel, and beg your forgiveness. Subsequently, the nightmares ceased.

Relax: The Holy Spirit Is in Control

I think that we can do with the New Testament citations of Deuteronomy 32:35 something like what the rabbinic sages do with 1 Samuel 13:1. Paul and the author of Hebrews assumed wrongly that the proto-Masoretic text of this verse with which they were familiar was correct. It was an honest-to-goodness human error. But the Holy Spirit allowed this because you and I needed to hear what Paul has to say in Romans 12:19.

And we need to hear, specifically, what he has to say from that faulty text. Vengeance is God’s alone. You and I have no right to pursue revenge when we suffer even the greatest of outrages. Instead, we are called to trust the God of justice to call everyone to account in His own providential working in history. This is a difficult, but necessary aspect of the Christian life. And this is not a message that was originally a part of the Book of Deuteronomy. But thanks to the New Testament perpetuating and enshrining this manuscript error, it is a message that is now an integral part of Christian ethics.

January 5, 2021January 5, 2021

Epiphany and the Nobility of Humankind

The Adoration of the Magi by Botticelli. Depicts the Epiphany of the Nobility of Humankind in the Christ Child

“Earth and Stars Hymn” by Jack Korbel

This is one of my favorite Christmas songs, written and performed by my good friend, Jack Korbel. (I really need to ask Jack whether he considers this to be a Christmas song). If I were to try and describe its message in one phrase, I think it is about epiphany and the nobility of humankind.

Oh, the wondrous light of a guiding star
serves to remind us of what we are.
Be humble for you are made of earth.
Be noble for you are made of stars.
Earth and Stars Hymn by Jack Korbel

The Creation of Adam

I thought of this song the other night as I was reading Midrash Bereshit Rabbah on the creation of Adam.

Everything that you see is generated from heaven and earth, as it is said, “God created the heavens and the earth” (Genesis 1:1). On the second day He created from on high, as it is said, “And God said, ‘Let there be a firmament'” (Genesis 1:6). On the third day He created from below, “And God said, ‘Let the earth bring forth grass'” (Genesis 1:11). On the fourth day He created from on high, “And God said, ‘Let there be lights'” (Genesis 1:14). On the fifth day He created from below, “And God said, ‘Let the waters swarm'” (Genesis 1:20). On the sixth day He came to create Adam. He said, “If I create him from on high now, the heights will lord it over the lowly things by one creation, and there will be no peace in the cosmos. And if I create him from the lowly things now, the lowly things will lord it over the heights by one creation, and there will be no peace in the cosmos. But, behold! I will create him from both the heights and the lowly things for the sake of peace.” Thus it is written, “And the LORD God fashioned the man, etc.” (Genesis 2:7). [He was made from] the dust of the earth, from the lowly things. “And He breathed into his nostrils the breath of life” (Genesis 2:7). This is from the heights. As Rabbi Simeon Ben Laqish said, “‘Sovereignty and fear are with Him. He makes peace in His heights’ (Job 25:2). ‘Sovereignty’ is Gabriel. ‘Fear’ is Michael.”
My translation of Midrash Bereshit Rabbah 12:8

Rivalry Between Heaven and Earth

So, human beings actually, by their very composite nature, are mediators between the material creation and spiritual realities. Consequently, our existence establishes peace (the Hebrew uses the richer word, shalom) between heaven and earth. Of course, the midrash above conveys this as though heaven and earth were engaging in a not-so-friendly rivalry. Depending on how God created Adam, either faction would be able to claim him. (This reminds me of my school days, when we learned about Kansas state history, and how the pro-slave and abolitionist parties violently quarreled over this territory in the days following the Kansas-Nebraska Act, hoping to build their respective representation in the federal government). God intentionally created Adam in such a way that both sides would be able to claim him as belonging with them. Thus, he is a bridge between heaven and earth. And being a mediator is one of the important jobs of priests. This further illustrates what I recently said about Adam’s priesthood.

St. Thomas Aquinas on the Composite Nature of Human Beings

This is actually very similar to what St. Thomas Aquinas has to say about human nature. You can read a great example of this in Summa Theologiae I:76:5:

The Philosopher [Aristotle] says (De Anima ii, 1), that “the soul is the act of a physical organic body having life potentially.”

… Since the form is not for the matter, but rather the matter for the form, we must gather from the form the reason why the matter is such as it is; and not conversely. Now the intellectual soul, as we have seen above (1:55:2) in the order of nature, holds the lowest place among intellectual substances; inasmuch as it is not naturally gifted with the knowledge of truth, as the angels are; but has to gather knowledge from individual things by way of the senses, as Dionysius says (Div. Nom. vii). But nature never fails in necessary things: therefore the intellectual soul had to be endowed not only with the power of understanding, but also with the power of feeling. Now the action of the senses is not performed without a corporeal instrument. Therefore it behooved the intellectual soul to be united to a body fitted to be a convenient organ of sense.

Now all the other senses are based on the sense of touch. But the organ of touch requires to be a medium between contraries, such as hot and cold, wet and dry, and the like, of which the sense of touch has the perception; thus it is in potentiality with regard to contraries, and is able to perceive them. Therefore the more the organ of touch is reduced to an equable complexion, the more sensitive will be the touch. But the intellectual soul has the power of sense in all its completeness; because what belongs to the inferior nature pre-exists more perfectly in the superior, as Dionysius says (Div. Nom. v). Therefore the body to which the intellectual soul is united should be a mixed body, above others reduced to the most equable complexion. For this reason among animals, man has the best sense of touch. And among men, those who have the best sense of touch have the best intelligence. A sign of which is that we observe “those who are refined in body are well endowed in mind,” as stated in De Anima ii, 9.

“Stuck In the Middle With You”

You might have to read that a few times before you really understand what St. Aquinas has to say there. In fact, it will help to read this whole section, including the preceding and following questions. What is important for our purposes here is that Thomas contrasts human beings with angels in that we have a much less perfect intellect, and with other animals in that our spiritual soul “has the power of sense in all its completeness.” So, you and I hold a middle position in creation. Another way of saying this is like this: in the human person, God really has established shalom between corporal and spiritual realities. We have a material body. But we bear the “image and likeness” of God. This is because Our Creator breathed our soul into us directly. He made us to rule over nature as His vassal lords and ladies. “I have said that ye are gods” (Psalm 82:6).

What Happened to Our Nobility?

Of course, the biblical narrative quickly moves away from this ideal picture of shalom between heaven and earth. In the Fall, our parents revolted against their Creator. The consequence is that nature now revolts against us. That includes our own personal natures. We easily fall prey to our bodily desires. Every broken New Year’s resolution is a reminder that you and I all too often behave more like earthly, brutish beasts than spiritual intellects. What we really need is an epiphany of the nobility of humankind.

If that’s where the story ended, the lowly things really would be able to take home a win in their struggle against the heights. Our debased and debauched identities would never be able to lay claim to our shared heritage with the denizens of heaven. We would never realize our crucial role as mediators between heaven and earth. There would be no shalom between these rival factions.

Epiphany Restores the Nobility of Humankind

Enter Epiphany.

Christmas is the great festal season of the Mystery of the Incarnation. On the Twelfth Day of Christmas we celebrate the manifestation of this mystery. In the modern West, we focus on the story of the Magi, and the manifestation of this mystery to the Gentiles. In the East, the focus is more on the Baptism of Our Lord. (But note: in the modern Catholic Church we still celebrate the Feast of the Lord’s Baptism on the Sunday following Epiphany).

In any case, both of these Gospel events are all about helping us enter into the wonder of the Mystery of the Incarnation. The Eternal Word of God has entered into Time and Space and taken on our very humanity. The Creator Himself now has a created body, crafted from the same dust that we are. He whom the heavens cannot contain has come down among the lowly things. A new mediator, a new Adam, bridges heaven and earth once again. Shalom returns to the picture. The visit of the Magi and the Baptism of Our Lord both bring us face to face with the epiphany of the nobility of humankind as uniquely embodied in Jesus.

More Epiphany of the Nobility of Humankind to Come!

This tips the balance of human nature towards the heights to an astonishing degree. What St. Thomas Aquinas says about our status in relation to the angels is, strictly speaking, true of our created nature. But the supernature of the Incarnation has done something to all of this that is beyond our comprehension. St. Paul says that we will judge the angels! (1 Corinthians 6:3). St. John says that what we are going to be has not yet been revealed, but we will be like Jesus (1 John 3:2). Whatever we are going to be, this revelation will be an epiphany of the nobility of humankind.

The Epiphany of the Nobility of Humankind and the Transfiguration

Perhaps this is why the third stanza of Jack Korbel’s sweet song is about the Transfiguration, another manifestation of our Lord’s identity. It is in the Transfiguration that we really see what humanity ennobled by divinity looks like. Following the star to Bethlehem, entering into the waters of Baptism with Jesus, and climbing up the path of Mt. Tabor all result in encounters with Jesus that wind up telling us something about ourselves. We recognize our frailty and earthiness.

The only proper response to such an epiphany is to bend the knee in reverent worship. To really see Jesus is to be humbled in an excruciatingly delicious way. But it is also to see the nobility that God has conferred upon our race. In Jesus, we once again reign with God over the cosmos. We can finally experience what it is to fulfill our Creator’s purpose of building shalom between the things on high and the lowly things within our particular domain. At last we can recognize the epiphany of the nobility of humankind.

December 31, 2020December 31, 2020

The Cosmos Is a Temple

I recently provided a literal interpretation of Genesis 1 based on the Babylonian creation myth, Enuma Elish. In that post, I focused on the author’s intention to create a counter-myth to Enuma Elish. But that was not all that the author was trying to do in Genesis 1. Perhaps his biggest message is that the entire cosmos is a temple.

This idea that the cosmos is a temple appears explicitly in the second chapter of Midrash Tadshe, a short rabbinic commentary on Genesis: “The Tabernacle was made in parallel to [God’s] creation of the cosmos.” It goes on to say that the Holy of Holies corresponds to the highest heaven (the abode of God) and the outer courts correspond to the material world.

Gottwald Agrees: The Cosmos Is a Temple

But I first encountered this notion of the cosmos as temple in Norman Gottwald’s book, The Hebrew Bible: A Socio-literary Introduction. My dear professor, Wilbur Fields assigned this book in our Introduction to the Old Testament course as a kind of foil to the fundamentalist readings of the Old Testament for which he was arguing. I remember harboring guilty feelings because I found a whole lot that Gottwald said to be compelling. The thing that most enchanted me was his approach to Genesis 1. This makes up a relatively small portion of his book, but it was the first time that I became aware of the riches of inter-textual interpretation.

The Construction of the Tabernacle Reflects the Construction of the Cosmos

What Gottwald points out is that the recurring phrase “and it was so” in Genesis 1 looks an awful lot like the phrase “as the Lord had commanded, so had they done it” that appears in Exodus 39:43. This passage in Exodus is about the construction of the Tabernacle in the wilderness. At every stage of the completion of the Tabernacle, a phrase very similar to that one appears. For instance, at the beginning of Exodus 39 it says, “they made the holy garments for Aaron; as the Lord had commanded Moses.” The correspondence is especially tight when considering that everything in Genesis 1 “was so” as a direct result of a verbal command from God. The same holds true of the Tabernacle. The Lord gives a verbal command to Moses as to how to construct the furniture of the Tabernacle, and the artisans do it just so.

That’s as much as Gottwald says. But this opens up more considerations for these passages. Consider the order of the days of creation and the furniture of the Tabernacle.

Day One: God Creates by Separating Things

The first day establishes things that will be given form later. All of these figure significantly in the function of the Tabernacle. First of all, these verses establish the basic pattern of creation. God creates by separation. This Hebrew verb (le-havdil) describes one of the roles of the priest, to distinguish between various things. Perhaps Leviticus 10:10 expresses this most explicitly. “You are to distinguish between the holy and the common, and between the unclean and the clean.” In a sense, the entire career of the Hebrew priest is bound up in this activity of separation. So, here the text depicts God as creating order in the cosmos by performing a priestly work. Inversely, this conveys that when the priests carry out their work of distinguishing properly, they maintain this cosmic order. The cosmos is a temple, and the Temple is cosmic.

The Liturgical Calendar in Genesis One: If the Cosmos Is a Temple, then It Needs a Calendar

The next thing that really grabs my attention is the fact that God establishes a calendar on the first day of creation. For the Hebrews, the main function of the calendar is liturgy. To really get a sense of just how liturgical Genesis One is, you should read Numbers 28-29, which lays out a detailed sketch of Israel’s festal calendar. If you do this right after having read Genesis 1, the parallels will be obvious. But, note that almost everything in Numbers 28-29 has to do with the sacrificial schedule in the Tabernacle. Again, that is a clue for us as to how to think about the story in Genesis 1, and how it depicts the cosmos as a temple. But it also suggests that the liturgical calendar and the sacrifices that are built into it are a means of participating in the original work of creation.

We’ll return to the waters and the light later on.

Day Two: The Firmament

On the second day, God creates the firmament. The purpose of the firmament is once again to separate, to distinguish between the waters above and below the firmament. There is no firmament in the Tabernacle. But the verbal root for the word translated “firmament,” rq”a’, does show up twice in association with the Tabernacle. Rq”a’ means “to hammer out into a sheet.” This is significant, because the verb only appears eleven times in the entire Hebrew Bible. First, Exodus 39 tells us how Bezalel hammered out gold leaf so that he could turn it into thread for the ephod.

The Ephod

²And he made the ephod of gold, blue and purple and scarlet stuff, and fine twined linen. ³And gold leaf was hammered out and cut into threads to work into the blue and purple and the scarlet stuff, and into the fine twined linen, in skilled design.

The Bronze Covering for the Altar

Then, in a more grisly passage in Numbers 16, we hear about the censers that Korah and his company used to offer incense before the Lord. They challenged the Aaronic privilege to the priesthood, and as a consequence, fire came out from the ark of the covenant and consumed them, Raiders of the Lost Ark style. Because these men had consecrated these censers to God, they could not simply dispose of them. Instead, craftsmen hammered them out and turned them into a covering for the altar of sacrifice.

³⁷“Tell Elea′zar the son of Aaron the priest to take up the censers out of the blaze; then scatter the fire far and wide. For they are holy, ³⁸the censers of these men who have sinned at the cost of their lives; so let them be made into hammered plates as a covering for the altar, for they offered them before the Lord; therefore they are holy. Thus they shall be a sign to the people of Israel.”
³⁹So Elea′zar the priest took the bronze censers, which those who were burned had offered; and they were hammered out as a covering for the altar, ⁴⁰to be a reminder to the people of Israel, so that no one who is not a priest, who is not of the decendants of Aaron, should draw near to burn incense before the Lord, lest he become as Korah and as his company—as the Lord said to Elea′zar through Moses.

Day Three: God Creates Seas

On the third day, God creates the seas. These correspond to the bronze laver in the Tabernacle, and the molten sea in Solomon’s Temple. (Midrash Tadshe states this unequivocally). Both the laver and the sea were round. Midrash Tadshe says that this was a reflection of the firmament that encircles the disc of the earth, surrounded by the seas. It was thirty cubits in circumference, in accord with the thirty days in a month. It measured ten cubits in diameter. This, too, has a cosmic significance according to Midrash Tadshe: Israel sustains the cosmos by performing the Ten Commandments. (Coincidentally, in the Hebrew text of Genesis, God also creates the universe with ten utterances).

The priests in the Tabernacle and Temple used both of these vessels to ritually wash their hands and their feet before offering sacrifices. The sea, because of its size and height, probably had a pool surrounding it into which water from the sea was run for this purpose. (In the Mass, our priests do this very thing, with much less water, at the beginning of the Eucharistic liturgy, to signify that they are offering the supreme sacrifice that Jesus made at Calvary).

Midrash Tadshe also says that the vegetation that God creates on the third day find its correspondence on the Table of Showbread. It even says that there are six loaves for the six months of winter produce and six for the summer. (They grow produce all year round in Israel).

The Table of Showbread from the Tabernacle. — One conception of the Table of Showbread. The twelve loaves are at either side of the table. In the middle is an ark containing frankincense.

Day Four: God creates the Luminaries, the Menorah of the Cosmos as Temple

On the fourth day, God creates the luminaries of the heavens. Midrash Tadshe tells us that these the Menorah, the lampstand that illumined the Holy Place, mirrors these. Not only this, but the two bronze pillars, Boaz and Jachin, represent the sun and the moon, respectively.

The Menorah as depicted on the Arch of Titus. From http://cojs.org/wp-content/uploads/2016/12/arch-temple-menorah.jpg.

Day Five: God Creates Birds and Sea Creatures

On the fifth day, God creates the creatures of the sea and the birds of the air. The cosmos begins to be populated. Priests will offer some of these creatures (pigeons and doves) in the Tabernacle as sacrifices in worship.

Day Six: God Creates Land Creatures for Sacrifice and Human Beings to Serve as Priests in the Cosmos Temple

The same is true of the land creatures God makes on the sixth day. Most of these are unclean, and consequently unsuitable for sacrifice. But Torah separates a select few for this purpose: cattle, sheep, and goats. And then, to crown the work of creation, God creates human beings in His image as the priests who will offer these gifts back to Him in sacrifice in the cosmos-temple.

The liturgical calendar of creation reaches its pinnacle on the seventh day, when God ceases from His labor, providing a model for His people to follow. To truly bear the image and likeness of God is to rest from our labors, as He does, and to reconnect with Him on the Sabbath, in the temple cosmos. All of the labors of the week are for the sake of enjoying the peaceful communion afforded by the Sabbath.

Midrash Bereshit Rabbah and the Literary Structure of Genesis One

Before wrapping this up, I’d like to draw attention to another aspect of the structure of Genesis One. The ancient collection of rabbinic commentary known as Midrash Bereshit Rabbah offers intriguing insight on this count. Although it doesn’t directly relate to the theme of cosmos as temple, it demonstrates that the ancient sages were not preoccupied with literalistic interpretations of Genesis One. They recognized it to be a carefully crafted literary work.

Midrash Bereshit Rabbah 12:5

Rabbi Nehemiah, a man from the village of Sihon, offered this midrash on Exodus 20:11, “Because in six days the LORD made the heaven and the earth, etc.”: These three things were the foundation of His creation of the cosmos, and they waited for three days, and brought forth three generations.
According to the house of Hillel: the earth was created on the first day, and waited three days, the first day, the second, and the third, and brought forth three generations, trees and grasses and the Garden of Eden. The firmament was created on the second day, and waited three days, the second day of creation, the third, and the fourth, and brought forth three generations, the sun and the moon and the constellations. And water was created on the third day, and waited three days, the third day of creation, the fourth, and the fifth, and brought forth three generations, birds and fishes and Leviathan.
Rabbi Azariah did not say the same thing. Instead, on the day that the LORD made heaven and earth there were two things that were the foundation of His creation of the cosmos, and they waited for three days, and their work was completed on the fourth.
According to the house of Shammai: The heavens were made on the first day, and waited three days, the first day of creation, the second, and the third, and their work was completed on the fourth. And what completed their work? The luminaries. The earth was made on the third day, “and the earth brought forth …” (Genesis 1:12). This was the foundation of His creation. And it waited three days, the third day of creation, the fourth day, and the fifth, and its work was completed on the sixth. And what completed its work? Adam, as it is said, “I made the earth, and created Adam upon it” (Isaiah 45:12).
Midrash Bereshit Rabbah 12:5, my personal translation

The Literary Structure of Genesis One in Tables

There are actually two different schemas for understanding Genesis 1 presented by two rival schools in that text. Both of them actually work, and perhaps both reflect the author’s intent. What Midrash Bereshit Rabbah is saying is that there is a structural correspondence between the first days of creation and the last ones.

Day 1: Earth Founded	Day 2: Firmament Founded	Day 3: Water Founded
Day 3: Earth populated with Trees	Day 4: Firmament populated with Sun	Day 5: Water produces Birds
Day 3: Earth populated with Grass	Day 4: Firmament populated with Moon	Day 5: Water populated with Fishes
Day 3: Earth finished with Garden of Eden	Day 4: Firmament populated with Constellations	Day 5: Water populated with Leviathan (“tanninim“)

The House of Hillel’s schema for the literary structure of Genesis One

Day 1: Firmament Founded	Day 3: Earth Founded
Day 4: Firmament completed with luminaries	Day 6: Earth completed with Adam

The House of Shammai’s schema for the literary structure of Genesis One

The Cosmos Is a Temple

The cosmos, then, is a temple. And the temple is a microcosm, i.e., a miniature universe. Sacred spaces like the Tabernacle sanctify the common places outside of their bounds. Animals that are sacred, like pigeons and bullocks, when the priest offers them in sacrifice, sanctify the common creatures who are not destined for the altar. Sacred times like the Sabbath sanctify the common days of the workweek. The priests of the Tabernacle and the priests ministering at our Eucharistic altars sanctify us common folk. All of this provides a means for every aspect of creation to actually be turned back to the glory of God in worship. God made you in His image to participate in this cosmic liturgy.