Moreover similar terms occur all through the present narrative. Even the simple words _God said_ cannot be taken literally, for there was no one to speak to. They must be meant in the sense that God _thought_, or that God _willed_. And we have no more right to suppose the days to be literal days than to suppose that God literally spoke. What we are to suppose in the one case is that God--the Almighty One, for whom nothing is too hard--created all things in such a way as might _to man_ be best represented by a simple word of command. And what we are to suppose in the other case, is that God--the Eternal One, to whom a thousand years are but as yesterday--created all things in such periods of time as might _to man_ be best represented by six days. Vast as the universe was, man was to regard it as being to God no more than a week's work to himself. In short, the time of creation, however long in itself, was utterly insignificant in its relation to God; to _Him_ each stage was a mere day. And this it may be added, is not a purely modern theory, made to reconcile the narrative with science; for the Greek Jew, Philo, born about B.C. 20, who knew nothing of geology, ridicules the idea of the days of Genesis being literal, or representing any definite periods of time.[12] [Footnote 12: Works of Philo Judæus, First book of Allegories of the Sacred Laws, Yonge's translation, 1854, vol. i., p. 52.] (3.) _Its gradual development._ Next, it must be noticed that, according to Genesis, God did not create a perfect world all at once, but slowly built it up step by step. At first the earth was waste and void, and only after it had passed through several stages did it become fully inhabited. Moreover, at every step (with two exceptions, the firmament and man, noticed later on), God examined the work and pronounced it _good_. He seems thus to have discerned a beauty and excellence in each stage; though it was not till the close of the whole work that He was completely satisfied, and pronounced it all _very_ good. And the narrative appears to be quite correct. For geology shows that the formation of the earth, with its various inhabitants, was a _gradual_ process, not accomplished all at once, but slowly step by step, through successive ages. And it also shows that these ages were of such magnitude and importance that we cannot regard them as mere preparations for man's coming, but as having a beauty and excellence of their own, so that they well deserved to be called _good_. But we may ask, how did the writer of Genesis know all this?