Emil Schürer writes:
“The third chief group of Philo’s works on the Pentateuch is a Delineation of the Mosaic Legislation for non-Jews. In this whole group indeed, the allegorical explanation is still occasionally employed. In the main however we have here actual historical delineations, a systematic statement of the great legislative work of Moses, the contents, excellence and importance of which, the author desires to make evident to non-Jewish readers, and indeed to as large a circle of them as possible. For the delineation is more a popular one, while the large allegorical commentary is an esoteric, and according to Philo’s notions a strictly scientific work. The contents of the several compositions forming this group differ indeed considerably, and are apparently independent of each other. Their connection however, and consequently the composition of the whole work, cannot, according to Philo’s own intimations, be doubtful. As to plan it is divided into three parts. (a) The beginning and as it were the introduction to the whole is formed by a description of the creation of the world (κοσμοποιια), which is placed first by Moses for the purpose of showing, that his legislation and its precepts are in conformity with the will of nature (προς το βουλημα της φυσεως), and that consequently he who obeys it is truly a citizen of the world (κοσμοπολιτης) (de mundi opif. § 1). This introduction is followed by (b) biographies of virtuous men. These are, as it were, the living, unwritten laws (εμψυχοι και λογικοι νομοι de Abrahamo, § 1, νομοι αγραφοι de decalogo, § 1), which represent, in distinction from the written and specific commands, universl moral norms (τους καθολικωτερους και ωσαν αρχετυπους νομους de Abrahamo, § 1). Lastly, the third part embraces (c) the delineation of the legislation proper, which is divided into two parts: (1) that of the ten chief commandments of the law, and (2) that of the special laws belonging to each of these ten commandments. Then follow by way of appendix a few treatises on certain cardinal virtues, and on the rewards of the good and the punishment of the wicked. This survey of the contents shows at once, that it was Philo’s intention to place before his readers a clear description of the entire contents of the Pentateuch, which should be in essential matters complete. His view however is in this respect the genuinely Jewish one, that these entire contents fall under the notion of the νομος.” (The Literature of the Jewish People in the Time of Jesus, pp. 338-339)
Emil Schürer comments:
“Περι της Μωυσεως κοσμοποιιας. De mundi opificio (Mangey, i. 1-42).—It was customary to place this work at the head of Philo’s works, before the first book of the Legum allegoriae. And this position has been resolutely defended, especially by Dähne. Gfrörer on the other hand already convincingly showed, that the book de Abrahamo must be immediately joined to de mundi opificio. He has only erred in the matter of declaring this whole group of writings older than the allegorical commentary (p. 33 sq.). It was easy to show in reply, that this popular delineation of the Mosaic legislation is on the contrary more recent than the bulk of the allegorical commentary. On the other hand there is nothing to prevent our relegating the work de mundi opificio also, to the more recent group. We have already shown, p. 331 above, that it is not connected with the allegorical commentary. On the contrary the beginning of the work de mundi opificio makes it quite evident that it was to form the introduction to the delineation of the legislation, and it is equally plain, that the composition de Abrahamo directly follows it. Comp. de Abrahamo, § 1: Ον μεν ουν τροπον η κοσμοποιια διατετακται, δια της προτερας συνταξεως, ως οιον τε ην, ηκριβωσαμεν. To refer this intimation to the whole series of the allegorical commentaries is, both by reason of the expression κοσμοποιια and of the singular δια της προτερας συνταξεως, quite impossible.—But however certain all this is, the matter is not thus as yet settled. For on the other hand it is just as certain, that the composition de mundi opificio was subsequently placed at the head of the allegorical commentaries to compensate for the missing commentary on Gen. i. Only thus can it be explained that Eusebius, Praep. evang. viii. 13, quotes a passage from this composition with the formula (viii. 12, fin. ed. Gaisford: απο του πρωτου των εις τον νομον). It is just this which explains the transposition of this treatise into the catalogue of Eusebius, Hist. eccl. ii. 18 (it was in his eyes comprised in the νομων ιερων αλληγοριαι), and also the peculiar form of citation: εκ του ζ και η [resp. εκ του η και θ] της νομων ιερων αλληγοριας, mentioned p. 333 above.—There still remains the question, whether this supplementary insertion of the Legum allegoriae between de mundi opificio and de Abrahamo originated with Philo himself? This is especially the view of Siegfried. It seems to me however, that the reasons brought forward are not conclusive. J. G. Müller has lately brought out a separate edition of this composition with a commentary.” (The Literature of the Jewish People in the Time of Jesus, pp. 339-341)
F. H. Colson and G. H. Whitaker write (Philo, vol. 1, pp. 2-5):
A Book of Laws, says Philo, is fitly prefaced by a Cosmogony. The theme dealt with by a Cosmogony is, indeed, too lofty for adequate treatment. In Moses’ treatment of it, two salient points at once meet the eye. The world’s origin is ascribed to a Maker, who is Himself unoriginate, and who cares for what He has made.

By “six days” Moses does not indicate a space of time in which the world was made, but the principles of order and productivity which governed its making.

Before the emergence of the material world there existed, in the Divine Word or Reason, the incorporeal world, as the design of a city exists in the brain of the designer.

The efficient cause of the universe (we must remember) is Goodness; and Goodness, to be attained by it as its capacity permits, is its final cause.

The incorporeal world may be described as “the Word of God engaged in the act of creating.” And the Word is the Image of God. In that, man (the part), and therefore the universe (the whole) was created.

“In the beginning” means for Philo the precedence of the incorporeal heaven and invisible earth. The pre-eminence of Life-breath and Light are shown, he says, by the one being called “the Spirit of God,” and the other pronounced “good” or “beautiful.” He sees darkness severed from light by the barrier of twilight; and the birth of Time on “Day One.” Philo strangely infers that a whole day was devoted to the creation of the visible heaven from the mention of a “second day” after that creation. Land and sea are then formed by the briny water being withdrawn from the sponge-like earth and the fresh water left in it; and the land is bidden to bring forth trees and plants. It is bidden to do so before sun and moon are made, that men may not attribute its fruitfulness to these.

Coming now to the work of the fourth day, Philo brings out the significance of the number 4, and points to the boons conferred on body and mind by Light, which has given rise to philosophy by drawing man’s vision upward to the heavenly bodies. He sees the purposes of these in their giving light, foreshowing coming events, marking the seasons, and measuring time.
The fifth day is fitly given to the creation of creatures endowed with five senses.

In connexion with the creation of man, Philo points out (a) the beauty of the sequence, ascending (in living things) from lowest to highest; (b) the reference, not to body, but to mind, in the words “after our image”; (c) the implication of exactness in the addition “after our likeness”; (d) the cooperation of other agents implied in “let us make,” such co-ordination accounting (so Philo suggests) for the possibility of sin; (e) four reasons for man coming last, viz.—

(1) that he might find all ready for him;
(2) that he might use God’s gifts as such;
(3) that Man, a miniature Heaven, might correspond to the Heaven whose creation came first;
(4) that his sudden appearance might over-awe the beasts.
His place in the series is no sign of inferiority.

Turning to the Seventh Day, Philo notes its dignity, and enlarges on the properties of the number 7, (a) in things incorporeal (89-100); (b) in the material creation: (α) the heavenly bodies (101 f.); (β) the stages of man’s growth (103-105); (γ) as 3+4 (106); (δ) in the progressions (107-110); (ε) in all visible existence (111-116); (ζ) in man, and all that he sees (117-121) and experiences (121-125); (η) in grammar and music (126 f.).

After speaking of the honour paid by Moses to the number 7, Philo, treating Gen. ii. 4 f. as a concluding summary, claims it as a proof that Gen. i. records a creation of incorporeal ideas. After a disquisition on the subject of fresh water, to which he is led by Gen. ii. 6, he goes on to deal with the earth-born man (Gen. ii. 7), whom he distinguishes from the man made after God’s image. The being of the former is composite, earthly substances and Divine Breath. Proofs and an illustration are given of his surpassing excellence. The title of “the only world-citizen” is claimed for him, and its significance brought out. His physical excellence can be guessed from the faint traces of it found in his posterity. It is to call out his intelligence that he is required to name the animals. Woman is the occasion of his deterioration.

The Garden, the Serpent, the Fall and its consequences are dealt with in §§ 153-169. The Garden, we are told, represents the dominant power of the soul, and the Serpent represents Pleasure, and is eminently fitted to do so. His use of a human voice is considered. The praise of the “snake-fighter” in Lev. xi. 22 is referred to. Stress is laid on the fact that Pleasure assails the man through the woman. The effects of the Fall on the woman and on the man are traced.

The treatise ends with a short summary of the lessons of the Cosmogony. These are:

(1) the eternal existence of God (as against atheism);
(2) the unity of God (as against polytheism);
(3) the non-eternity of the world;
(4) the unity of the world;
(5) the Providence of God.