Discussions regarding creation in the Bible often revolve around the current debates over the origins of the universe, creation versus evolution. Such debate fails to appreciate the broad scope of creation language and motifs found in the Scriptures. Creation language is used in the Bible not only to speak about the physical world but about the birth of nations and the establishment of order in those nations. To understand the Biblical use of creation motif, we must take a holistic view of its usage in the Scriptures as well as comparative usage in the ancient Near East. Once we have accomplished this, we will investigate the underlying theology of creation and why it is so often connected to praise. Finally, we will apply this knowledge to a few select Psalms to gain a better understanding of the message presented in these Psalms.
Identifying the Creation Motif in the World of Ancient Israel
To begin our study on the use of creation motif in the Psalms, we must first understand how ancient Israel understood “creation.” To the Scriptural authors, creation was not limited to the creation ex nehilo of the material world. Creation in the Bible and ancient Near East (ANE) occurred when something was separated out as a distinct entity, given a function, and given a name. Thus, the Bible can use the same term, ברא, to speak of the creation of the cosmos (Gen. 1:1) and the creation of a distinct people group (Ps 102:17). Leeuwen adds that, in addition to separation, creation also emphasizes the bonds between those things that were separated from one another. Thus, man is connected to the soil from which he is separated (a pun on Adam; Gen 2:7), man is connected to woman (אִישׁ and אִשָּׁה; Gen 2:23), and mankind is bound to God (Gen 1:26-27). He also identifies a partial list of significant roots which appear with ברא and express the same creational activity. His list includes עָשָׂה “make, do”; יָצַר “form, shape”; פָּעַל “make, work”; שִׂים “set, put”; כּוּן “establish, make firm”; יָסַד “found, establish”; יָלַד “bear, bring forth”; נָטָה “spread out (heavens as a tent)”; and קָנָה “get, beget, create.”
Creation myths from Mesopotamia, Egypt, and Ugarit involved cosmogony occurring as the result of a primeval battle between a creator deity and a chaos monster, who was most frequently associated with the sea or river. There are several Biblical allusions to such chaos monsters (Leviathan, Tannin, Rahab, etc.), although there is no text which describes a battle between YHWH and such a creature. We will discuss later how the references to these chaos monsters in the Bible create a polemic against the beliefs of the surrounding cultures.
The creation motif in the ANE was not primarily concerned with cosmogony. That is to say; ancient man was not entirely consumed with understanding the origins of the world, much like the science of today. Rather, the primary concern was to their present world and continuance of that world. For example, the annual Akitu festival in Babylonian festival featured a recital of Enuma Elish, the Babylonian hymn of creation. The hymn functioned to glorify Marduk and to appeal to his primordial victory as a guarantee of the present and future well-being of the city. In ANE thought, the god/God who established order through creation is the god/God who will continue to sustain order in the cosmos. This is why the primary concern of Biblical creation accounts (Gen. 1-2, Ps. 104, Prov. 8:22-36) is not the mechanics of creation, but the fact that YHWH alone formed the cosmos and thus continues to sustain it. Creation is not only the advent and renewal of the state of order in nature, but it is also just as much, if not more, the order of the political state. The repulsion and destruction of enemies are often spoken in the terminology of Chaoskampf, the struggle with Chaos. Enemies of the state are none other than manifestation of chaos and must be driven back. Speaking on this, Levenson writes, “throughout the ancient Near eastern world, including Israel, the point of creation is not the production of matter out of nothing, but rather the emergence of a stable community in a benevolent and life-sustaining order.”
Internal to a nation, Chaos took the form of injustice, especially the oppression of the weak. Thus, the giving of law enacts the establishment of creation order, and the keeping of the law maintains the creation order. This relationship can be seen in the prologue to the Code of Hammurabi,
Marduk…established for him in [Babylon’s] midst an enduring kingship, whose foundations are as firm as heaven and earth – at that time, Anum and Enlil named me to promote the welfare of the people, me, Hammurabi, the devout, god-fearing prince, to cause justice to prevail in the land, to destroy the wicked and the evil, that the strong might not oppress the weak, to rise like the sun…
The association with creation and law occurs in the Bible as well. In the prologue to the Ten Commandments, YHWH identifies Himself as the one who separated Israel from Egypt (i.e. creation of the nation; Exod. 20:2) and bases the cessation of labor on the Sabbath upon the seven-day creation narrative (Exod. 20:9-11, cf. Gen. 2:1-3). YHWH is the creator of the world because He liberated it from chaos (or at least, non-order, “תֹ֙הוּ֙ וָבֹ֔הוּ”; Gen. 1:2) and thus He is the creator of Israel because He liberated her from oppression. Proverbs 8:22-31 speaks of the creation of the world through Wisdom and is immediately followed by a call for obedience (8:32-36). Psalm 19:1-6 praises the creation as the glory of God and then is followed by the praise of the law of YHWH (19:7-14).
As seen above in the prologue to the Code of Hammurabi, kings of the ancient Near East were charged with establishing justice to subdue the chaos of oppression. In Egypt, this concept was known as maat and was the duty of the king. “Maat refers to the order and harmony of creation; its associated ideas are truth and justice. A rupture in the harmony, truth and justice of the creation is an assault against maat.” The Bible also contains similar kingship ideology. The king of Israel is the “son of God” (Ps. 2:7), YHWH’s regent, and is charged with maintaining the order and justice in creation. The failure of the Davidic monarchy was interpreted as plunging into chaos, an emotion that is evident in the second part of Psalm 89 lamenting this event (89:38-45). This theme is picked up by the New Testament writers who present Yeshua as the promised Davidic king (the meaning of “messiah”) and depict him overcoming the forces of Chaos personified by demons, storms, and out of control religious leaders and governing authorities. Paul, understanding this motif, proclaims Yeshua’s victory on the cross to be an act of new/renewed creation!
The Theology of Creation in the Psalms
The Bible is permeated with the language of creation, especially when the reader understands the full scope of what constituted creation terminology in the ANE. The significance of creation theology is evident in the ordering of the Torah. Israel’s Scriptures do not begin with the nation’s rescue from Egyptian bondage. Instead, they open with the creation of the cosmos and humankind. For the Israelites, the creation story served to describe the relationship between diverse parts of reality; God, nature, humanity, and society. Mankind is created to be the image-bearers of God (Gen 1:27) instead of the temple idols of the pagan nations. They are tasked with the vocation of replicating the images of God to fill the entire earth (1:28), thus expanding the order of the Garden outwards, creating order out of chaos. Mankind is also charged with ruling over the creation (1:26); the duty of maintaining the order which God originated. YHWH thus created humans to be His regents on earth, a fact reflected on in Psalm 8.
Fretheim, who has advanced the study of creation theology considerably, summarizes creation activity in the Hebrew Bible into three interrelated points; God’s work of originating, continuing and completing creation. As originator, God is the ultimate source of not only the natural world, but of social, cultural, and national order. God continues His creative work through both preservation and innovation (progressive revelation). This continuity includes God’s salvific action through the return of the exiles (Isa. 40-55) as well as the messianic mission. God’s salvific action does not preclude humanity from acting counter to God’s action; God allows anti-creational activity within certain bounds. God’s completion of creation is not a return to the beginning, but rather a fulfillment of the original vocation of subduing the entire earth (Gen. 1:28). The goal is that the whole earth is filled with the glory of God (Ps. 72:19).
Brueggemann takes a more critical view of creation theology. While he agrees that the Scripture’s creation language express a claim of YHWH’s sovereignty against idols and false orderings of the world, he finds its relationship to kingship problematic. He warns that presenting creation theology in this manner serves to legitimize political powers as being part of God’s intended order. Aalso creates justification for appeal to “natural law,” when “natural law” is “nothing more than simply the dominant values held by the dominant class.” While misuse of creation theology is a valid concern, it should not dictate our understanding of Biblical theologies. History is filled with the abuse of many Biblical beliefs; this does not invalidate them, rather it serves as a warning to those who teach of how important it is not to manipulate the message of Scriptures to follow modern trends. The Psalms often present kingship as being part of God’s world order and, at times, even connect that order with creation (cf. Ps. 72:1-8).
Elsewhere, Brueggemann presents a model for classification of each psalm that is strikingly similar to creation theology, although he does not specifically mention “creation theology.” Brueggemann proposes that all psalms can be separated into three categories: orientation, disorientation, and new orientation. Psalms of orientation speak of human life during seasons of well-being and satisfaction that evoke gratitude for the constancy of blessing. Psalms of disorientation articulate of human life during periods of hurt, anguish, alienation, suffering, and death. The disorientation evokes rage, resentment, self-pity and even hatred for the supplicant. When one is experiencing disorientation, and there is a turn of surprise, and the supplicant becomes overwhelmed by the new gifts from God, light breaks through the darkness, joy breaks through despair. These psalms are what Brueggemann labels as psalms of new orientation.
These categories fit nicely into creation theology; originating creation is orientation, disorientation is chaos, and new orientation is nothing less than new creation! Brueggeman identifies the creation psalms (Ps. 8, 33, 104, 145) as orientation to the daily experience of life’s regularities, a statement of God’s control over the cosmos. He identifies lament psalms as Psalms of disorientation that speak about “the collapse of all oriented forms, and yet to assure that even in the chaos of the moment there is Yahweh-directed order.” These disorientation psalms thus speak to our struggle to restore creation order in lives now devoid of such order. The fact that the psalmist feels that he/she can bring such complaints to God indicates an ongoing faith in God’s faithfulness in continuing creation. When chaos is overcome, there is new orientation, just like the ANE motif of creation out of chaos. Israel sings songs of new orientation because YHWH has defeated the chaos of disorientation and has created something new. Brueggemann identifies the creation Psalm 148 with this new orientation. This new orientation as new creation is found as a motif in Isaiah 40-43, in Yeshua’s resurrection, and in the New Jerusalem in Revelation. By applying Brueggemann’s categories to the Psalms, one can observe that the creation motif as understood as God’s order of the cosmos and the struggle to overcome the chaos in the lives of the individuals and the people of God as a nation which threatens that order. It is for this reason; I would propose that the psalms naturally flow in and out of creation language, with only one psalm (Ps. 104) being entirely devoted to creation.
Creation and Praise in the Psalms
What is the significance of including creation language in Israel’s praise? The Psalms have occupied a special place in the lives of those who profess faith in the God of Israel for thousands of years. Because of their poetic nature, they became the hymnbook of the Temple, the Synagogue, and the Church. Across the generations, the Psalms have been repeated more than any other Scripture. Indeed, the Psalms begin with a statement of how blessed will be the one who “meditates,” or better translated to “mutter” or constantly repeat, on the Torah of YHWH (Ps. 1:2). This sentiment is repeated in Psalm 35:28, except for now it is a promise for the reader to continually mutter YHWH’s righteousness and praise all day long. Thus, the Psalms themselves speak of the need for near-constant repetition in the lives of all believers.
The power of speech cannot be understated. “[S]peech leads reality, and until reality is spoken, we do not know reality, perceive it, or embrace it.” It is not enough that God created the world. God’s people must continually affirm His creative action and continuing creative action as the only reality. Only when this is done does such activity shape the worldview of the believers and, thus, can expand into the worldview of others. Brueggemann identifies that it was precisely the act of worship for the community gathered around Yeshua that was an “act of world-formation.” Praise of YHWH as Creator insist that this is the true world and thus all other worlds are false! This world-creating power of the Psalms remains true today; laments insist that God does hear and does care about our troubles, imprecations insist that God will demand justice for the oppressed, and praises insist that YHWH is the one true God of all. Creation Psalms (and other creation accounts) are written as a polemic against the belief that some other god(s) created the world, especially through chaoskampf. This message does not resonate with today’s society as there are not many people today that believe such things. However, the creation motif still speaks powerfully against today’s naysayers. Evolutionary theory denies any role of a higher power in shaping the world. It teaches that mankind finds his identity in the earth. The creation psalms speak out polemically against such a worldview; they shout that it was YHWH who formed the cosmos and continues to sustain them. Our identity comes from our Creator, not from the creation (cf. Ps 8).
Murán’s study on twelve primary creation themes in the book of Psalms has led to some enlightening conclusions that help us better understand the creation motif’s usage in the Psalms. He makes eight key observations on the creation theme in Psalms: 1) The use of creation language broadens the scope of the text to speak of all nations rather than just Israel. It often includes non-human creation as well. 2) Creation always carries a subtext of praise and frequently breaks into worship. 3) Creation by YHWH is a historical fact, and those who refuse to recognize God’s handiwork are called wicked. 4) Creation is not accident; God has intent and purpose in creation. 5) Creation is always viewed from the perspective of the post-Flood, sinful world. 6) When creation is linked to humanity, the emphasis is on our short lifespan; when creation is associated with God or His law, it highlights the eternality of both. 7) Creation often incorporates the Exodus story. 8) When compared to other ANE myths, creation emphasizes monotheism. Objects deified in other nations are nothing but created servants of YHWH that do as He commands and give Him praise.
Creation Motif in Select Psalms
As we have observed, the creation motif runs strongly through the Psalms. When we broaden the identification scope to include psalms which do not speak of originating creation or the physical world but do contain themes of continuing creation and the struggle with chaos, almost all Psalms contain some aspect of creation theology. Overcoming chaos in the lives of individuals and the nation and maintenance of God’s good order are indeed creation motifs. However, due to the limited scope of this paper, we will only investigate three psalms which have a clear creation motif in them, Psalms 8, 19, and 104.
Psalm 8 is a hymn of praise. Significantly, it is the first hymn of praise in the Psalms and is clearly a creation Psalm. Psalm 8 differs from Psalm 104 in that the focus is upon the creation of mankind and the vocation of humanity to rule over the creation. The psalm departs from similar texts in the ANE; rather than the king as the image of the deity as several Egyptian and Mesopotamian royal inscriptions proclaim, all of humanity is cast in royal terminology. DeClaissé-Walford, Jacobson, and Tanner make a powerful point that royalty in the Old Testament needs to be understood as a calling to a higher standard of responsibility, not a license to wreak havoc at one’s whim. This equal measure of authority and responsibility is commanded in Deuteronomy 17:14-20. Psalm 8:4-6 thus give an indication that all of humanity is charged with the royal vocation of both authority and responsibility. With such an understanding, concerns about the potential abuse of creation theology to legitimize out of control political authority, as Brueggemann was concerned with, should be alleviated, since political authority is a directive of all humanity and only within the bounds of reflecting God’s righteous rule.
There also exists a hint of anti-idolatry polemic in Psalm 8. Most nations in the ANE, including many unfaithful in Israel, worshiped the heavenly bodies as gods. Rather than giving these heavenly bodies any power, the psalmist belittles them by calling them “the works of your fingers” (Ps. 8:3). Rather than being potential rivals for YHWH, the heavenly bodies are creations of the minor significance; that is, there was no difficulty for YHWH to create them. The Psalm also proclaims that everything that passes through the seas has been placed under mankind’s feet (8:6-8). As mentioned above, the creation myths of the surrounding ANE nations frequently featured the seas as representing chaos, and the sea monsters as deities that the creator god(s) had to battle. Here, there is no hint of battle. Rather than having the capability of threatening YHWH, the sea and creatures in it are placed in submission to humanity.
Psalm 19 consists of three parts; creation praise (vv. 1-6), Torah praise (vv. 7-10), and servant obedience (vv. 11-14). We thus see a progression from a call to praise God as Creator, to rejoicing in the wisdom of YHWH’s Torah, into faithful obedience to YHWH. McCann points out that the translation in 19:7 that the Torah of YHWH is “perfect” is misleading since we often relate this to moral perfection. Rather, תָּמִים is better understood as meaning to “complete” or “all-encompassing,” thus rendering 19:7a as “The Torah of YHWH is all-encompassing.” This rendering then creates unity between 19:1-6 and 19:7; just as the sun makes an all-encompassing circuit to provide light and heat necessary for human life, so too the Torah of YHWH is all-encompassing. The implication is that the Torah is YHWH’s means by which creation order is sustained, “returning the soul” (19:7) to its original condition. The paralleling of creation and Torah also creates a message of the universality of Torah. The Torah is not just intended for Israel, as a mere test to see if they will be obedient. Rather, its wisdom has universal application for all of humanity to bring the blessing of God’s creation order to all the families of the earth (cf. Gen 12:3), not just to Israel.
The description of the sun in 19:4-6 has some parallel to an ancient Sumerian hymn. In the hymn, the sun-god, who was the god of justice, is called the “hero who goes out,” and a “warrior” (cf. Ps. 8:5’s גִּבּוֹר) entering the bed chamber of his wife. In Akkadian, the sun-god was often called the “bridegroom.” As usual in the Psalms, there is no hint of the deification of the sun. The sun is merely part of God’s creation and is obedient to the instructions of God. It is not the sun which gives justice; it is YHWH’s Torah. And it is only mankind who fails to be obedient, even when he attempts to maintain faithfulness (19:12a). The psalmist recognizes his own flawed nature and that it is only YHWH who can empower him to be complete (19:12b-13). If God can set the sun in its course, certainly He can empower the psalmist to keep the Torah so that his heart can rejoice (19:8) just as the sun rejoices in its obedience (19:5).
Psalm 104 is the only psalm which focuses entirely on creation. Brown finds this psalm a fitting match for Job 38-41 while Davidson finds strong parallels to the seven-day creation narrative of Gen 1-2:3. Davidson’s outline for the parallels to the seven-day creation narrative are quite convincing, but beg the question of dating for both. Does Genesis 1-2 predate Psalm 104? If it does, we should understand Psalm 104 as an intertextual commentary on the Genesis creation account. There is a resemblance between Psalm 104 and the Hymn to the Aton, composed during the reign of Pharaoh Amunhotpe IV in the mid-fourteenth century BCE. Amunhotpe rejected the multiplicity of gods of Egypt and displayed sole devotion to Aton which resulted in hostility towards him. Levenson’s study of this hymn noted seven points of congruence between it and Psalm 104, leading him to conclude that the Hymn to the Aton influenced the writer of Psalm 104. This influence could have equally been the other way around, that an early version of Psalm 104 influenced the author of the Hymn to Aton. The timeframe of mid-fourteenth century BCE certainly places its composition within the timeframe of the Israelites in Egypt, and the emergence of a sort of monotheism (although it is debated as to whether Amunhotpe was what we label as monotheistic) could reflect Israelite influence. If this is the case, then Psalm 104 or a prototype version of it predates Moses’ creation account in Genesis. Davidson rejects this earlier dating in favor of a dating from the Davidic era with the possibility of the psalmist having knowledge of the Hymn to the Aton. He fails to provide evidence for the availability of this hymn to a poet living at least four hundred years after its composition, especially given the unpopularity of Amunhotpe’s attempted reform.
The Hymn to the Aton and Psalm 104 exhibit a goal of shocking the reader out of his/her familiarity with the natural order presented by society by presenting the reader with a perpetual newness of nature. Psalm 104 does not place an emphasis on mankind’s role as caretakers of creation like the Genesis creation account does. Rather the psalm is theocentric with an emphasis on YHWH’s immense joy in His creation. In fact, שׂמח, “rejoice,” is one of the most common words in the psalm. This creates a paradigm shift for human mindset; not all the creation was designed solely for us! Rather than describing the purpose of the trees of Lebanon for use in building houses and war machines, the psalm identifies that the springs water the trees so that the trees can provide nesting grounds for birds to sing praises to God. The psalmist provides many examples of the symbiotic relationship established in the creation order with no emphasis on mankind’s dominion over the creation. This, perhaps, is why the editor(s) of the Psalms chose to place this psalm within the fourth book of the Psalms; it reflects the exilic struggle with Babylonian domination over Israel and reminds the reader that God’s creation intent is for rejoicing, not for sorrow.
Like the Genesis creation account, Psalm 104 contains little to no hint of chaoskampf. The seas, representing chaos in pagan creation myths, flee from the sound of YHWH’s voice, not from a primordial battle. The frightening sea monster Leviathan, whom Job dedicates an entire chapter to, turns out to be nothing more than God’s creation. Rather than being God’s enemy whom He must battle, Leviathan was created for God’s enjoyment to play in the sea! Of all creation, there is only one thing which blemishes God’s perfect order, sinful human beings. The beauty of praise presented in Psalm 104 is presented with the blemish of verse 35, “may sinners be removed from the earth and the wicked exist no longer.” This verse has proved troubling to commentators, but in understanding the creation motif and its combination with chaoskampf in ANE literature, the message becomes clear. ““By cursing the wicked, the psalmist transfers the evil chaos traditionally assigned to mythically monstrous figures such as Leviathan and places it squarely on human shoulders.” Rather than blaming chaos on malicious divine forces, it is our choices which create chaos in the world. YHWH’s battle is not with a primordial chaos monster; it is with humans who refuse to acknowledge Him and praise Him as the Creator of heavens and earth.
We have seen that the creation motif runs deep through the Psalms when understood from the perspective of originating, sustaining, and completing creation. Creation theology acknowledges YHWH’s creation of the cosmos as a foundational worldview which demands a response of praise. It establishes our identity as being sourced in YHWH. The chaos we experience in life does not spring forth from demonic powers which present a credible threat to God; they stem forth from our own disobedience. Creation order demands God’s justice be established as a means of suppressing the chaos of human oppression. This was the intended function of the Davidic kingship. The failure of the Davidic line to uphold righteousness and justice unleashed chaos upon the nation, but hope returned for new creation in the form of the Messianic promise.
The Psalms analyzed in this paper feature a common theme of rejecting false gods of nature and demanding a response of praise to our Creator. They seek to create within us a worldview of YHWH’s sovereignty over every aspect of the cosmos. By joining in the chorus of believers who have read, sung, and chanted these psalms for thousands of years, and through the power of Yeshua who freed us from bondage to chaos, we become part of a revolution which seeks to complete the vocation given to Adam to fill the whole earth with images of God who reflect His creational order into all of creation. We become new creation.[Note: This paper was originally written in fulfillment of degree requirements for the class Exegesis of the Psalms at the Seminary of Lincoln Christian University, March 2017]
Brown, William. The Seven Pillars of Creation: The Bible, Science, and the Ecology of Wonder. New York: Oxford University Press, 2010. iBooks.
Brueggemann, Walter. Israel’s Praise: Doxology against Idolatry and Ideology. Philadelphia: Fortress Press, 1988.
Brueggemann, Walter. The Message of the Psalms: A Theological Commentary. Minneapolis: Augsburg Publishing House, 1984.
Brueggemann, Walter and William Bellinger, Jr. Psalms. New York: Cambridge University Press, 2014. iBooks.
deClaissé-Walford, Nancy, Rolf A. Jacobson, and Beth LaNeel Tanner. The Book of Psalms. Edited by E. J. Young, R. K. Harrison, and Robert L. Hubbard Jr. The New International Commentary on the Old Testament. Grand Rapids, MI; Cambridge, U.K.: William B. Eerdmans Publishing Company, 2014. Logos Bible Software.
Fretheim, Terence. God and World in the Old Testament: A Relational Theology of Creation. Nashville: Abingdon Press, 2005.
Knierim, Rolf. The Task of Old Testament Theology: Substance, Method, and Cases. Grand Rapids, MI: William B. Eerdmans Publishing Company, 1995.
Leeuwen, Raymond. “בָּרָא,” New International Dictionary of Old Testament Theology & Exegesis. Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan Publishing House, 1997. Logos Bible Software.
Levenson, Jon. Creation and the Persistence of Evil. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press, 1994. iBooks.
Longman III, T. “Proverbs 1: Book Of,” ed. Peter Enns, Dictionary of the Old Testament: Wisdom, Poetry & Writings. Downers Grove, IL: IVP Academic; Inter-Varsity Press, 2008. Logos Bible Software.
Mays, James Luther. Psalms. Interpretation, a Bible Commentary for Teaching and Preaching. Louisville, KY: John Knox Press, 1994. Logos Bible Software.
McCann Jr., J. Clinton. A Theological Introduction to the Book of Psalms. Nashville, TN: Abingdon Press, 1993.
Miller Jr., Patrick. “The Poetry of Creation: Psalm 104,” ed. William Brown and Dean McBride Jr., God Who Creates: Essays in Honor of W. Sibley Towner. Grand Rapids, MI: William B. Eerdman’s Publishing Company, 2000.
Murán, Alexej. “The Creation Theme in Selected Psalms,” ed. Gerald A. Klingbeil, The Genesis Creation Account and Its Reverberations in the Old Testament. Berrien Springs, MI: Andrews University Press, 2015.
Oden Jr., Robert. “Cosmogony, Cosmology,” ed. David Noel Freedman, The Anchor Yale Bible Dictionary. New York: Doubleday, 1992. Logos Bible Software.
Pritchard, James Bennett ed., The Ancient Near Eastern Texts Relating to the Old Testament, 3rd ed. with Supplement. Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1969. Logos Bible Software.
Schmid, H.H. “Creation, Righteousness, and Salvation: ‘Creation Theology’ as the Broad Horizon of Biblical Theology,” ed. Bernhard Anderson, Creation in the Old Testament. Philadelphia: Fortress Press, 1984.
Simkins, Ronald. Creator & Creation: Nature in the Worldview of Ancient Israel. Peabody, MA: Hendrickson Publishers, 1994.
Van Pelt, M.V. and W.C. Kaiser. “הָגָה,” Willem VanGemeren, ed., New International Dictionary of Old Testament Theology & Exegesis. Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan Publishing House, 1997. Logos Bible Software.
Walton, John. Ancient Near Eastern Thought and the Old Testament: Introducing the Conceptual World of the Hebrew Bible. Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Academic, 2006. Logos Bible Software.
Wyatt, Nicolas. Space and Time in the Religious Life of the Near East, vol. 85, The Biblical Seminar. Sheffield, England: Sheffield Academic Press, 2001. Logos Bible Software.
 Walton, Ancient Near Eastern Thought and the Old Testament, 88.
 Leeuwen, “בָּרָא,” New International Dictionary of Old Testament Theology & Exegesis, 1:732.
 Ibid, 1:730.
 Oden, “Cosmogony, Cosmology,” The Anchor Yale Bible Dictionary, 1:1164.
 Wyatt, Space and Time in the Religious Life of the Near East, 211.
 Schmid, “Creation, Righteousness, and Salvation,” 104.
 Levenson, Creation and the Persistence of Evil, 54/304. iBooks.
 Ibid, 105.
 Pritchard, Ancient Near Eastern Texts Relating to the Old Testament, 164.
 Knierim, Task of Old Testament Theology, 209-210.
 Longman, “Proverbs 1,” Dictionary of the Old Testament: Wisdom, Poetry & Writings, 547.
 Brueggemann & Bellinger, Psalms, 1282/2207 iBooks.
 Cf. Gal. 6:12-16; 2 Cor. 5:14-19; Eph. 2:11-22, 4:17-2; Col 1:13-21, 3:1-11.
 Simkins, Creation & Creator, 33.
 Fretheim, God and World in the Old Testament, 2.
 Ibid, 5-9.
 Brueggemann, Israel’s Praise: Doxology against Idolatry and Ideology, 101.
 Brueggemann, Message of the Psalms, 19.
 Ibid, 28.
 Ibid, 54.
 Ibid, 20.
 Ibid, 124-125.
 Ibid, 165.
 Van Pelt & Kaiser, “הָגָה,” NIDOTTE, 1:1007.
 Brueggemann, Israel’s Praise: Doxology against Idolatry and Ideology, 15.
 ibid, 27.
 Murán, “The Creation Theme in Selected Psalms,” 220-221.
 Mays, Psalms, 67.
 DeClaissé-Walford, Jacobson, and Tanner, The Book of Psalms, 127.
 Ibid, 123.
 McCann, A Theological Introduction to the Book of Psalms, 28-29.
 DeClaissé-Walford, Jacobson, and Tanner, The Book of Psalms, 208.
 Brown, Seven Pillars of Creation, 251/606. iBooks.
 Davidson, “The Creation Theme in Psalm 104,” 155-156.
 Pritchard, ANET 369-371.
 Levenson, Creation and the Persistence of Evil, 92-96/228. iBooks.
 Davidson, “The Creation Theme in Psalm 104,” 152.
 Levenson, Creation and the Persistence of Evil, 95/228. iBooks.
 Miller, “The Poetry of Creation: Psalm 104,” 98.
 Ibid, 97-98.
 Brown, Seven Pillars of Creation, 263-264/606. iBooks.
 Translation mine.
 Brown, Seven Pillars of Creation, 257/606. iBooks.
 Cf. Romans 1:21.