Why does Genesis not mention the creation of fire?

Question

Scientists say that fire, in the form as we have it on planet earth is hardly seen in any other part of the universe. One of the earliest references to fire in OT is Gen 22:6 :

And Abraham took the wood for the burnt offering and laid it on his son Isaac, and he took in his hand the fire and the knife. So the two of them walked on together.

< Of course, fire has been and is vital to the survival of human life, whether in the form of light or heat. But then, we do not find Genesis mentioning the creation of fire . How do Bible scholars interpret the absence of such a reference ?

Answer 1

The ceremonial law speaks extensively about the use of fire to purify things and also its use in the context of the burnt offering, the major sacrifice. In Genesis 4:4, "Abel also brought of the firstborn of his flock and of their fat portions." It does not explicitly mention fire, but the presentation of the fat portions in the law always involved fire. It is thus logical to infer that Abel presented a burnt offering.

A second reference that certainly implies fire is in Genesis 4:22, which says "Zillah also bore Tubal-cain; he was the forger of all instruments of bronze and iron." You cannot forge bronze and iron without fire.

These two people, Abel and Tubal-Cain (son of wicked Lamech), represent holy and unholy uses of fire. It is the first uses of fire rather than the actual discovery of fire that is recorded. It is in these uses that we see men pursuing their purposes, sacred and profane. The meaning and purpose of things is important in the Bible, less so the mechanics.

Answer 2

Considering that the primordial history section of Genesis is written in the form of literary myth (not false myth) it is not an unreasonable question to ask! So here is the first reference of fire.

After he drove the man out, he placed on the east side of the Garden of Eden cherubim and a flaming sword flashing back and forth to guard the way to the tree of life. (Genesis 3:24)

This logically means we knew what fire was before we were cast out of the garden of eden. Even if the flaming sword is symbolic or poetic, we knew what fire was before that event.

Answer 3

Honestly, just because I don't think it was relevant to mention it. If you read the account of Genesis 1, it also doesn't mention the creation of water. It says that God created the earth and the the Spirit hovered over the face of the deep. We just assume (rightly) that water was also created when the earth was created. And water is far more necessary for survival than fire.

It also doesn't mention the creation of Oxygen, which is more necessary even than water (although I suppose you could rightly argue that they are as vital as one another, just that you would live for slightly longer without water than you would without oxygen). There is a record of the atmosphere being created, but no mention of making it breathable. That is just assumed.

In like manner, we know now through observation of the sun, that the creation of fire must be assumed for the sun to be as it is. That is probably as close as you are going to get to a recorded creation of fire.

But to get to the reason, I think it is because the whole of scripture is actually pointing to Christ, and that is it's purpose. So fire is mentioned when it is relevant to that end, but otherwise it is left out. Even if you look in Genesis 1, you see prophetic pictures of Jesus popping up all over the place. The reference to the Spirit of God hovering over the face of the deep (a prophetic picture of a suitable dwelling place not being found for God, a picture expanded on in the dove that Noah sends out from the ark, and then completed with the Spirit descending onto Jesus 'as a dove' at His baptism); the light being created 2 days before the sun and moon were created (showing that it was something far more eternally significant than the light energy produced by the sun, a picture expanded upon again at Jesus death, that as the source of the Light of life was made sin, or darkened, for 3 hours, so also the sun lost it's power to share light); and the sun and the moon to rule over the day and night (a prophetic picture of Christ ruling his kingdom - the eternal day, as it would always be daytime to someone on the same orbit as the sun - and the moon being the demonstration of his Church on Earth - to rule over the night, in other words to be the 'light bearers' of the night [the time between the fall and the second return of Christ] - and the moon only being useful as a light if it is reflecting the light of the sun, just as we can only serve God on earth by reflecting Christ).

The list goes on and on, but in summary and as far as I understand it, specifically recording the creation of fire wasn't necessary to point to Jesus Christ and His Gospel of Salvation, and so it wasn't recorded.

I hope this helps, God bless :)