“Let there be light” - language used?

[chuckd]

This question came from my 7 year old daughter and it has really made me think. “When God said ‘Let there be light’, what language did he use? English? Latin? Greek?”

My immediate thought was he didn’t actually say it. There was no human to hear it so it did not require a condescension on his part to use human language. But then we hold the narrative to be historically accurate so he must have said it.

I told her “probably Hebrew” which she had never heard of. So I showed her the Hebrew language online to mask that I didn’t actually know the answer.

Has anyone thought about this? Maybe some angelic language if the angels were present?

 

[Santiago DO]

It's an interesting question, and probably we won't be able to know it until we ask Him in heaven.

But I would say that Moses understood it in Hebrew in order to pass down the revelation.

 

[Contra_Mundum]

Language changes over time. It isn't a static construct that has a fixed form, invariant over generations. Typically it evolves slowly, and it's possible (sometimes with effort) to connect and comprehend to an ancient speaker through a written record. I'm not sure, however, that we of modern times could easily (or at all) understand medieval spoken English, let alone its precursor tongue.

There is also the sudden--i.e. not evolved--changing of human language at Babel. The splitting divergence that was likely to have come from a single, common language through geographic dispersal and isolation was both accelerated and (likely, in my estimation) compounded by divine intervention. If one of the residual languages was closer in form to the proto-language, we are left to nothing more than speculation concerning which one. There is no theological reason to assume Abraham spoke that one, or that his covenant descendants preserved a peculiarly holy linguistics in Moses' age.

Preservation of God's self-disclosure through the instrument of human communication is one of his gracious miracles to mankind in general. The specific language Abraham or Moses spoke and in which the data entrusted to them was recorded seems incidental rather than vital to the content. Neither Babel nor the ordinary process of time with entropy prevents the word of God from echoing through time for the purpose of clearly communicating to all men, in many generations, regardless of the variety of tongues.

At Pentecost, believers, but particularly Apostle Peter spoke the saving gospel, which was miraculously transmitted to the ears of people of many different and distinct extractions. There's no way to tell from what we read in Act.2 if the miracle was entirely in the mouth of the speaker or the ears of the hearers. Many languages were heard, but a single message was conveyed. What if instead of the written word, we had a virtual ringside seat at movie presentation of divine creation filmed from some intra/extra cosmic perspective? Perhaps the language we heard would be according to the need of the individual.

Moses' writing is the "amber" substance God used for passing down to future ages his word. Thus encased, we are able to study, admire, and translate it for varied purposes. Take it out of that substance (as if to get to it more directly) and maybe it will turn into irretrievable dust.

I told her “probably Hebrew” which she had never heard of. So I showed her the Hebrew language online to mask that I didn’t actually know the answer.

By the way, I think this was just fine as a parent's useful, off the cuff response.

 

[Charles Johnson]

I'm inclined to think God did not literally speak, any more than God literally has a mouth, lips, and a tongue. God's speaking in Genesis 1 is an analogical way of describing the execution of his decrees in time by his immediate will and power.
Of course, the angels, which were probably created first, would have been there to hear if he spoke with an audible voice.

 

[earl40]

I'm inclined to think God did not literally speak, any more than God literally has a mouth, lips, and a tongue. God's speaking in Genesis 1 is an analogical way of describing the execution of his decrees in time by his immediate will and power.
Of course, the angels, which were probably created first, would have been there to hear if he spoke with an audible voice.

I agree in it In my most humble opinion it is analogical to allow us created beings to comprehend that God acted in time. Also light was created first, before air, which is essential to audible sound. Now the question is should a parent teach what I just wrote and, about how the bible uses all kinds of analogical and anthropomorphic words? I say yes, and start young, to avoid the future thinking that God is like man apart from The Man Jesus.

 

[Jerusalem Blade]

I am of the view that the words of Gen 1:3, "and God said..." should be taken literally. The preincarnate eternal Son of God is called in John 1:1 the Word – the logos – of God, expressing the thought or heart of God. Of course God could just have imagined it and willed it into being, but it is written He spoke it so. The language? It was given by the Spirit in Hebrew for Moses to write it – being Moses' tongue – but we will have to wait for Him to let us know.

 

[iainduguid]

Historically, there have been many sincere believers who have argued that God spoke Hebrew in the Garden of Eden (and earlier), mostly desiring to protect the integrity of the Scriptures. The problem is that this seems linguistically naive: "Hebrew" is no more one thing than "English" is: languages develop and change over time. What is more, they seem to be related more or less closely to other particular languages in ways that suggest (tentative) family trees. Most people who study these things do not see (Classical Biblical) Hebrew as the original language from which other languages are descended. IRather, (Classical Biblical) Hebrew is one of many branches on the family tree. It is possible that they are completely wrong about this, but I don't think concern for Biblical inerrancy requires this. Consider: the speech of other people is regularly translated from other languages into Hebrew in the OT (e.g. Pharaoh or Nebuchadnezzar), without raising concerns about inerrancy. So Moses could have accurately represented what God said (which in the case of Genesis 1, would have had to be revealed to humanity by God himself) in the language of Moses' own time, without the original having to have been said in Hebrew. There are some plays on words in the Creation account (man-woman; ish-ishah) which plausibly suggest that it may have had some individual similarities with Hebrew (?), but we really don't need to speculate on the subject, beyond affirming that what Moses said God said is actually (an accurate representation of) what God said - just as with Pharaoh and Nebuchadnezzar.

 

[therussellhome]

I agree in it In my most humble opinion it is analogical to allow us created beings to comprehend that God acted in time. Also light was created first, before air, which is essential to audible sound. Now the question is should a parent teach what I just wrote and, about how the bible uses all kinds of analogical and anthropomorphic words? I say yes, and start young, to avoid the future thinking that God is like man apart from The Man Jesus.

God is no more limited by a lack of air to carry sound that he is my a lack of sun and stars to produce light.

Like the OP's daughter, I find it intriguing to wonder what language was used for creation and pre-Babbel. My guess is on some long lost language but that answer will have to wait. Just as I wonder if God will reunify language in the new earth or if He will give us the challenge of learning them all to go with "every nation, tribe, people, and language"