Biblical Hebrew Forum

["JAMES CHRISTIAN READ" <JCR128 AT student.apu.ac.uk>]

>
> But let's just read the text as it stands without
> imposing any other ideas on it. Let's take the first
> two verses and see what they have to say:
>
> "In the beginning God created the heavens and the earth.
>
> The earth was without form and void, and darkness was upon the face of the 
> deep; and the Spirit of God was moving over the face of the waters. " (RSV)
>
> Now, the opening statement tells us that elohim made
> the arets (everything below our feet) and the shamayim
> (everything above our feet). This is a rather simplistic
> cosmological view but it is one that everyone I have
> ever met seems to have some kind of innate understanding
> of and the hebrew bible seems to portray such a man's
> point of view cosmology throughout the text.
>

Both eretz and shamaim are explicitly defined in the chapter as the
dry land and the firmament dividing the waters below and the waters
above respectively. Throughout the chapter the waters are treated as a
separate entity from the heavens and the earth. Congratulations, you
have just met someone new who holds a different point of view than the
"simplistic cosmological view" of your other friends so you need not
use that generalization again.

JCR:
I'm sorry, but this is simply not correct. No such 
explicit division is defined. In fact, we would do well 
to question why the hebrew bible has a different word 
for dry land than the generic arets that is used before 
hand.

> Next we are told that elohims spirit is flying about
> over the surface of the water. Now with your strict
> understanding of verse 1's reference to creation of
> only heaven and 'earth' you almost reasonably conclude
> that this must mean the water was already there as no
> mention is made of any creation of water. But could it
> not be that most people would understand that the
> creation of the water was greatly implied with the
> explicit creation of the earth?

The explicit creation of the earth takes place in verses 9 and 10 and
specifically refers to where the water has been held back. Compare to
Job 38

KJV
8 Or who shut up the sea with doors, when it brake forth, as if it had
issued out of the womb?
9 When I made the cloud the garment thereof, and thick darkness a
swaddlingband for it,
10 And brake up for it my decreed place, and set bars and doors,
11 And said, Hitherto shalt thou come, but no further: and here shall
thy proud waves be stayed?

JCR: I'm sorry, but you have completely lost me here. 
All I see is a description of the seas being defined 
boundaries. I don't see any mention of them existing 
before the heaven and the earth.

Of course I have to point out the very strong parallel here to Marduk
ripping Tiamat in half and turning the lower half into the sea and the
upper half into the waters above the heavens. Tiamat being a symbol of
chaos in Enuma Elish. It very closely parallels this first creation
story.

JCR: Again, I'm sorry, but there is no parallel 
whatsoever. One talks about a mythical creature being 
torn in half and the other talks about elohim using his 
spirit to define the motions and limits of water, a 
miracle that Isrealite history is familiar with in 
light of the crossing of the Red Sea and of the river 
Jordan.

>After all, our little
> planet is well known for being covered over 80% in
> water so most people would be forgiven for reaching
> such a conclusion without the author having to explicitly
> write 'in the beginning god made the heaven, the earth
> and the water on it' on the offchance that some
> conspiracy theory about water already existing would
> be born a few thousand years later.
>

Are you suggesting that Moshe understood the 80% of the earth's
surface was water? Are you suggesting he even understood that the
earth was a planet? Or even what a planet was other than a star that
moved?

JCR: Not really! I was just suggesting that it doesn't 
come at a far stretch of the imagination that the word 
arets could well have implied everything beneath the 
feet.

One final note would be the verb bara' more likely means to cut out,
fashion or shape. So 1:1 could actually read: In the beginning God
molded the heavens and the earth.

JCR: Yes! This is exactly the kind of thing that Dr. 
Davila used to tell me when I was one of his students.
And I distinctly remember that when I asked him how he 
supported such a view which included a view that the 
heavens and earth existed before Genesis 1:1 as a 
primordial goo the only evidence he could bring was that 
he had formulated his opinion based on ancient mythical 
epics just as you claim. This is why I am left with 
the strong suspicious feeling that you are just 
repeating theories you have read and heard elsewhere 
rather than reading the text at face value.

I also notice that you have completely failed to attempt 
to address the reference I gave you in Proverbs 8:22-24 
which clearly shows that hebrew tradition understood 
the earth, the heavens and water to have had a beginning.

And finally, I seriously doubt you don't hold the same
cosmological model we all hold in common. There is what
is beneath our feet and there is what is above ground.
There is nothing else to the physical universe. It is
undeniable. Please enlighten me as to what else there
could possible be.
ed a view that the
he