Skip to Content.
Sympa Menu

b-hebrew - RE: My understanding of Gen 1:1-3

b-hebrew AT lists.ibiblio.org

Subject: Biblical Hebrew Forum

List archive

Chronological Thread  
  • From: "Peter Kirk" <Peter_Kirk AT sil.org>
  • To: "'Biblical Hebrew'" <b-hebrew AT franklin.metalab.unc.edu>
  • Subject: RE: My understanding of Gen 1:1-3
  • Date: Fri, 16 Aug 2002 01:21:01 +0100


Ian, you may believe that it is a "fact that the creation took place
over six days", like "Creation Scientists". But I really think that you
should give some justification for making such assertions which are far
from self-evident, even as the perspective of the author of Genesis 1.
As far as I can see, the text as we have it clearly states that certain
creative events took place before God said "Let there be light",
according to the normal understanding of the WAYYIQTOL verb here (at the
start of v.3) which is to indicate sequence after some preceding event.
This analysis may be debatable, but it is not a self-evident "fact" that
it is false.

Peter Kirk

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Ian Hutchesson [mailto:mc2499 AT mclink.it]
> Sent: 15 August 2002 09:02
> To: Biblical Hebrew
> Subject: Re: My understanding of Gen 1:1-3
>
> This is an automatic response. I'm not at home at the
> moment.
>
> >a GRAMCORD search of "et hassamayim waet ha'arez" reveals 12
> >occurrences outside of Gen 1:1.
>
> It might be worthwhile considering the significance of some
> of these in themselves. I have stated often that many
> analysts giving their opinions on Gen 1 overlook the text
> as a whole, willing to disregard the fact that the creation
> took place over six days each commencing with an act of
> divine fiat and that day one started with God saying "Let
> there be light". What comes before is preamble.
>
> Ex 20:11 expresses the importance of the six day creation:
>
> For six days, the Lord created the heavens and the earth
> and the sea and all that which is in them, and rested the
> seventh day.
>
> Ex 31:17 expresses the same idea, again tying the six days
> to the creation of the heavens and the earth.
>
> The literary form of the Gen 1 creation is clear. Each day
> starts with
>
> w'mr 'lhym (and God said,...)
>
> and ends with an indication of which day it was. Day one
> starts in v3:
>
> w'mr 'lhym yhy 'wr wyhy 'wr
>
> And God said, let there be light and there was light.
>
> The Exodus understanding was that the creation was over
> six days, not that there was a creation and then came six
> days of rearrangement of what was created (making the
> first stage rather useless, for the all-powerful creator
> could simply have created everything in one step, besides
> creating chaos -- for the earth was thw wbhw -- doesn't
> make much sense in itself).
>
> Here the fundamentalist and the evangelical Christian
> says, "but Gen 1:1 says that in the beginning God created
> the heavens and the earth", to which Rashi would have
> asked, "the beginning of what?", for he says that br'$yt
> requires qualification. He says:
>
> if you insist on the simple interpretation, interpret
> it thus. At the beginning of the creation of heaven and
> earth, when the world was unformed and desolate, G-d
> said, "Let there be light." This verse does not intend
> to teach the sequence of creation -- that these were
> [created] first. For if that was the intention, it
> should have written, "At first G-d created the heavens,"
> etc. For the word {br'$yt} never appears in Scripture
> except when it is annexed to the following word. For
> example, "At the beginning of Yehoyakim's reign," [or]
> "The beginning of his reign," [or] "The first of your
> corn crop." Here, too, you must interpret "In the
> beginning El-him created" as if [it were written] "At
> the beginning of the creating." [We find] similarly, "
> {txlt} ," as if to say, "At the beginning of G-d's
> speaking to Hoshea, G-d said to Hoshea,"
>
> The last reference is to Hos 1:2, showing that there the
> beginning is qualified, ie the beginning of God's
> speaking to Hosea.
>
> Note Rashi's recommended reading:
>
> At the beginning of the creation of heaven and
> earth, when the world was unformed and desolate, G-d
> said, "Let there be light."
>
> This grammatically makes perfect sense, though he has
> simplified v2. I have shown elsewhere that whole
> clauses can be governed by phrases like "on the day"
> or "at the time", just as "in the beginning" can
> subordinate "of God's creation of the heavens and the
> earth". I would place all of v2 as starting conditions
> for the creation announced in v1 and begun in v3.
> There was no creation for the waters nor the darkness:
> they were at the beginning, just as God and the wind
> were. It was from them that God created the heavens
> and the earth. The text tells us that God created the
> heavens on the second day with the construction of the
> firmament and the earth on the third day with the
> separation of the dry land from the waters.
>
> If God created the heavens on day two and the earth on
> day three, how could God have already created the
> heavens and the earth in v1? The answer is that the
> text simply doesn't allow such an interpretation.
>
> In the beginning of God's creation of the heavens
> and the earth, when the earth was chaos and empty,
> when darkness was on the face of the deep and the
> wind of God hovered over the face of the waters,
> God said, "Let there be light", and there was light.
>
> God did not create the earth as chaos (Isa 45:18). His
> creation brought order (against thw, chaos), for in
> the first three days God structured the cosmos, and
> content (against bhw), for in the second three days he
> populated the cosmos.
>
> I have also pointed out many times the close structural
> relationship with the Enuma Elish:
>
> 1) there was watery chaos when Marduk/Elohim began
> the creation,
> 2) its name was tiamat/tehom,
> 3) the wind of Marduk/Elohim was present,
> 4) the battle which ensued (not found in Gen 1 but
> elsewhere in tnk) finished with the beginning
> of creation out of tiamat/tehom,
> 5) Marduk/Elohim separated the waters above and
> below,
> 6) Marduk/Elohim secured the waters above and from
> the rest, out of which the creation continued.
>
> The creation began according to the Enuma Elish
> when the waters were vanquished. This is consistent
> with Gen 1: the waters were already there.
>
> The major difference with the Enuma Elish is that
> Gen 1 has an extremely different concept of God.
> There is no battle, for God transcends such things.
> In most cases it is sufficient for God to speak and
> it is so. (The wind, whose role in Gen 1 is unclear,
> was the tool which Marduk used to defeat the waters
> of chaos.) Nevertheless, the Enuma Elish elucidates
> the creation in Gen 1, showing when it began.
>
> The writer of the Wisdom of Solomon talks of God's
> hand "which created the world out of formless matter."
> This is an ancient reading of Gen 1 which indicates
> that God created the cosmos out of raw materials,
> which one finds in Gen 1:2.
>
>
> Ian
>
>
>
>
>
>





Archive powered by MHonArc 2.6.24.

Top of Page