Known in Hebrew as סֵפֶר בְּרֵאשִׁית sēp̄er bərē’šîṯ, the book of
Genesis is the most criticized and revered document of beginnings known to man.
From anti-religious atheists to hyperliteralist creationists, there are many to
whom Genesis remains an obsession. This ancient work has caused much
controversy in colleges and judicial settings, having been used to condemn
everything from homosexuality to evolution. Unfortunately, there is a growing aversion
to this ancient work in society, especially in places of education. Something that was once
treasured by kings is now detested by peasants.
Though Genesis certainly originated
with the Divine, the identity of its human author has been lost in the annals
of time. Internal anachronisms point to a composition long after the events
which it describes. And tradition reports that the hand of Moses penned it
originally though many critics assert otherwise.
This work establishes the prevailing
theme of all scripture introducing concepts such as the second-born being
greater than the firstborn, humanity in the image of God, affliction of the righteous seed, the Sabbath, and many
others. So it is certainly not a stretch of logic to say the book’s most
important episode lies at its opening. This pericope often called the hexameron and "Creation Week" is theologically rich and smells of poetry, yet technically it is prose. In fact, many
readers miss this crucial point and subsequently fail to discern the theological message that lays at its nucleus. Genesis is the foundation of all scripture, and deciphering Gn 1-3 is the first step to unlocking the Hebrew Bible. To the hexameron we now turn.
§1:1.1| In the beginning - Literally "in a first" or "when first." Due to syntactical issues stemming from the nounרֵאשִׁית rē’šîṯ apparently in construct form to the finite verb בָּרָא bārā’, this phrase is translated in various ways: "when at first," "when (God) began to (create)," "In the beginning," "in the beginning of when," etc. A Jewish work from antiquity called Genesis Rabbah (1:1) asserts,
Thus God consulted the Torah and created the world, while the Torah declares, "withרֵאשִׁית rē’šîṯ God created" whereרֵאשִׁית rē’šîṯ is referring to the Torah as in the verse (Prv 8:22), "Adonai made me, theרֵאשִׁית rē’šîṯ of His way."The sages equated the רֵאשִׁית rē’šîṯ from Gn 1:1 with Lady Wisdom who, according to Prv 8:22, is the רֵאשִׁית rē’šîṯ of Adonai’s way. Then in Dt 4:6 the Torah is referred to as Israel's wisdom, explaining the above statement "whereרֵאשִׁית rē’šîṯ is referring to the Torah as in the verse . . . ." Thus the Targum Yerushalmi, an Aramaic paraphrase from the early Common Era, opens Gn 1:1 saying "With wisdom the Lord created …." Further, one encounters wisdom in other literature saying things such as,
Listen to Wisdom! She proudly sings her own praises among the Israelites, her own people, in the assembly of the Most High, in the presence of his power. I am the Word spoken by the Most High. I covered the earth like a mist. I made my home in highest heaven, my throne on a pillar of cloud. Alone I walked around the circle of the sky and walked through the ocean beneath the earth. I ruled over all the earth and the ocean waves, over every nation, over every people. I looked everywhere for a place to settle, some part of the world to make my home. Then my Creator, who created the universe, told me where I was to live. Make your dwelling in Israel, he said. The descendants of Jacob will be your people. He created me in eternity, before time began, and I will exist for all eternity to come. (Sir 24:1-8)There is an entire array of ancient literature expressing this same sort of wisdom theology. The identification ofרֵאשִׁית rē’šîṯ with wisdom is directly related to the ancient premise underlying the Logos theology in the Johannine prologue (Jn 1:1-18).
§1:1.2| God created - Or "fashioned" them, and not from nothingness (creatio ex nihilo) as is commonly believed. The word behind “fashioned" or “created” is the Hebrew verb בָּרָא bārā’ a verb that, in this pericope, indicates God creating by means of preexisting matter – a concept called creatio ex materia.[i] This understanding of the word is corroborated throughout the rest of the narrative as בָּרָא bārā’ shows up only where matter is generated from other matter.[ii] In context of creation, it is concerned with achieving order from chaos, a concept common to ancient near-eastern cosmogonies.[iii] This notion is obvious in our creation narrative, for the earth was a chaotic mess of darkness and water from which emerged all that is humanly tangible.
As far back as the 3rd
century CE, Genesis Rabbah discussed creatio ex
materia as an interpretation of Gn 1:1-3. While one voice disagrees with
the idea that God would use chaotic matter that is akin to a garbage dump to create earth, R. Huna appears to have defended the notion of
creation by preexisting matter. The midrash states,
Said Rab: In human practice, when an earthly monarch builds a palace on a site of sewers, dunghills, and garbage, if one says, "This palace is built on a site of sewers, dunghills, and garbage," does he not discredit it? Thus, whoever comes to say that this world was created out of “formless and void and darkness,” (Gn 1:2) does he not indeed impair (God's glory)! R. Huna said in Bar Kappara's name: If the matter were not written, it would be impossible to say it: "God created heaven and earth." Out of what (was it created)? (It was created) out of "now the earth was formless and void."
Lastly, In 1 Sm 2:29 it is written "... and honor your sons above Me, to fatten (= לְהַבְרִיאֲכֶם) yourselves." In this case, the verb בָּרָא bārā’ occurs functioning in a different stem (hiphil infinitive) where it means to "fatten" and persons are the object of fattening. Verbs do take on different meanings in different stems, but this case still speaks about the semantic range of the root ברא br’. Before matter can be fattened, it must first exist. And as shall be demonstrated further on, matter had already existed in Gn 1:2 before even light was manifested.
§1:1.3| the heavens and the earth - Note the order: (a) the heavens then (b) the earth is mentioned. This is the same sequence in which they are later created – heavens on day two (1:6-8) and earth on day three (1:9-13).
§1:1.4|
In the beginning God created the heavens and the earth - At what point in creation week is this verse
describing? Was it on day one that God
created the heavens and the earth or at sometime later? Some believe this to be a record of what
occurred on day one and others a summary of what occurred in days one through
six with 1:2-3 being where the narration of day one begins. Furthermore, others
believe that an indeterminate “gap” of time - perhaps millions or billions of
years - lie between 1:1-2, but the answer is not difficult to ascertain. The terms שָׁמַיִם šāmayim (= "heaven") and אֶרֶץ ’ereṣ (= "earth") are names issued by God on days two
and three of the creation week.[iv] Before God issued these names,
the heaven was referred to as a רָקִיעַ rāqîa‘ (= "firmament") and the earth was called יַבָּשָׁה yaḇbāšâ (= "dry land").
So why does Gn 1:1 refer the reader to names not yet introduced rather than using the original generic terms "firmament" and "dry land"? Further, "the heaven" and "the earth" both carry a definite article הַ ha (= "the") in verse 1 where they first appear. While this miniscule point
would go unchecked by a reader of English, it runs contrary to the way Biblical
Hebrew narratives typically introduce characters.[v] And, grammatically in the narrative, the heavens and earth are treated as
characters. Why in the very beginning of the bible is there a chronological and literary anomaly?
The key is that Gn 1:1 provides not merely an
introduction but a brief synopsis of the entire creation week; thus, the
appellations “heaven” and “earth” from later in the narrative are employed as
descriptors in the opening summary. This is similar to how a newspaper summarizes
an article into a few words to create an opening headline. Because 1:1
functions as a synopsis, it is anachronistic[vi] to the creation narrative thereby proving that not everything should be understood chronologically. Alternatively, there is a view that holds 1:1 to be a statement of creatio ex nihilo that occurred prior to 1:2ff. This view finds support in the qatal usage of the verb בָּרָא bārā’ as an indicator for the past-perfect. While tenable, this view posits disparate definitions of the terms "heaven" and "earth" in 1:1 from that found onwards; thus, "heavens" = "cosmos" and "earth" = "globe" in Gn 1:1.
Behold how complex the very first verse of the Torah is! Let this testify to the intricacy of scripture and why it is prone to be misconstrued by myopic, cursory, and untrained readers.
Behold how complex the very first verse of the Torah is! Let this testify to the intricacy of scripture and why it is prone to be misconstrued by myopic, cursory, and untrained readers.
§1:2.1| the earth had been - For how long? Only The Holy One knows. The Hebrew of this verse indicates a past-perfect verb[vii] according to the subject-verb order, where וְהָאָרֶץ (= "and the earth") precedes הָיְתָה (= "it was"). Thus, the syntax here conveys to the reader that an unspecified amount of time had already elapsed in earth’s history – “the earth had been . . . .” Genesis 1:2 isn’t declaring what occurred from the very inception of primeval earth or time. Instead, the narrative picks up at some unknown point in the distant past after the global matter had already been established.
And as in 1:1 the term “earth” refers to the same dry land that
doesn’t appear until day 3; thus, 1:2 is reporting that this would-be dry land
had been in a chaotic state proving its existence on or before the first day.
§1:2.2|
formless and void - In Hebrew this alliteration תֹהוּ וָבֹהוּ ṯōhû wāḇōhû conveys an idea of "unusable disorder." This exact phrase, which is a hendiadys, appears
in only one other passage (Jer 4:23) where it also describes the state of the
earth. Both times this hendiadys occurs in scripture two conditions are present: (1) a lack light from
heaven and (2) an uninhabitable earth.
§1:2.3|
darkness - The noun חֹשֶךְ ḥōšeḵ meaning "darkness" or "deep blackness" is
frequently used as a metaphor for death, calamity, wickedness, and the grave.[viii]
During such cases, it is reminiscent of when the earth was "unusable disorder" or "formless and void" (of stability and life). So when used in a
negative sense, it represents the antithesis of created life or thriving. It is
the blackhole of oblivion, the state opposite of flourishing.
§1:2.4|
darkness upon the face of deepness - When
was darkness manifested for the first time? Did it simply always
exist? Furthermore, where did the deep come from? The text here
forces the reader to assume (1) certain components of the narrative always
existed or (2) the documentation of their origins is purposely
neglected. In light of the past-perfect verb discussed in §1:2.1 and other
scriptures,[ix] the second assumption is preferable.
§1:2.5|
the Spirit of God hovering upon - A verse of special importance, for it conveys the activities of God in relation to time and space. This and Gn 2:2 are most peculiar to the narrative in this respect. Further, the word מְרַחֶפֶת məraḥep̄eṯ (= "hovering") describes an eagle fluttering over her offspring in Dt 32:11. This may have allegorical implications.
§1:2.6|
darkness upon the face of deepness and the Spirit of God hovering upon the face of the waters -
This sentence employs a form of literary parallelism.[x]
The words "deep(ness)" (= תְּהֹום təhôm) and "the waters" (= הַמָּיִם hammāyim) are paralleled. Further, the phrase "upon
the face of" (= עַל־פְּנֵי ‘al-pənê) occurs twice, once after each of the paralleled terms. This all becomes more apparent when viewed in the original language as laid out below. Note the lines (b) and (d):
There
is more parallelisms within these two clauses to document but not without some explication.
Though not obvious at first, lines (a) and (c) also share symmetry. The
phrase ”and darkness (was)” mirrors the phrase “the spirit of God (was) hovering” just as (b) mirrors (d), though in a different manner.
The
text indicates that “darkness” and “the spirit of God“ existed at the same location simultaneously: both were
"upon the face of" (= עַל־פְּנֵי ‘al-pənê) the same primeval liquid (where תְּהֹום təhôm = הַמָּיִם hammāyim). Synonymous in Hebrew are the terms “deep” and “waters.”[xi] This proves that, at least in regards to location, the
subjects of lines (a) and (c) coalesce. Further, 2 Sm 22:12 and Dt 5:23 portray God
as situated in the midst of "darkness" (= חֹשֶךְ ḥōšeḵ) corroborating the idea
of God’s spirit existing conterminously
with darkness (upon the deep-waters).
Something
else that is shared between God
and "darkness" in this narrative is that both have no documented origins, which may have further implications. And because God and "darkness" are often antithetical, 1:2 may be an example of a contrasting parallelism.[xii]
This complex verse requires further study if its secrets are to be
gleaned.
§1:3.1| And God said - This is the beginning of day one. All other days commence this same way, opening with "And God said" (= 'וַיֹּאמֶר א), a phrase utilizing the wayyiqtol (continual narrative) form -- for example see vv.6 , 9, and 14. Moreover, v. 2 begins with a qatal verb functioning as a past-perfect (see §1:2.1), followed by a participle (רוּחַ א' מְרַחֶפֶת). It isn't until 1:3 that God acts in the wayyiqtol narrative tense, through which He commences each creation day.
§1:3.2| let there be light - The world was created in ten utterances.[xiii] Light, being the first of these, is unique from all of the rest because it is the only time God commands something into existence from absolute nothingness.[xiv] Light's institution meant that life could now be introduced and sustained possibly explaining why succeeding scriptures use the term "light" (= אוֹר ’ôr) as a symbol for life and resurrection.[xv] Considering the metaphoric usage of light found in other passages, is it possible that the Holy One did not merely manifest photons on this day but also invented the concept of earthly life?
This may represent the first morning ever recorded. But seeing that a separation between darkness and light occurs in the next verse and that there's some ambiguity to where within each creation day "evening" and "morning" falls, one cannot be sure.
§1:3.3|
there was light – Light and the seventh day (Sabbath) are the only things in the narrative which are not formed from other matter. Rather, these are simply manifested into existence – one by God
uttering “let there be light” and the other by Him simply pausing (2:2-3). Subsequently,
neither בָּרָא bārā’ nor עָשָׂה ‘āśâ[xvi] which indicate generating matter from other matter are used to describe the creation of the Sabbath (seventh day) or light.
§1:4.1| God saw that the light was good - The Holy One, blessed be He, reviews each day’s relative creations. While read cursorily by most, this small clause “God saw” is very important, for it documents what was created by God on each respective day. By taking note of what God saw on day one, we can deduce what He didn’t create this day: earth, darkness, and the deep. These already existed. This is more evidence that 1:1 isn’t documenting what occurred on day one and that it is likely a synopsis. Nothing in scripture is superfluous.
§1:4.2| God divided between the light and between the darkness – This most
pivotal event should pique the interest of any careful reader. Why?
Because during day four, this same act is repeated
through the implementation of firmamental "lights" (= מְאֹרֹת mə’ōrōṯ) that are again said to divide
the "light" (= אוֹר ’ôr) from the "darkness" (= חֹשֶךְ ḥōšeḵ). Let us jump forward momentarily to demonstrate:
But God Himself had already divided the "light" from the "darkness" in 1:4! And there's even a word pun connecting the "light" (= אוֹר ’ôr) of day one and the "lights" (= מְאֹרֹת mə’ōrōṯ) of day four.
1:18a
|
And to rule over the day and night and to separate between the light and the darkness.
|
וְלִמְשֹׁל בַּיּוֹם וּבַלַּיְלָה וּלְהַבְדִּיל בֵּין הָאוֹר וּבֵין הַחֹשֶׁךְ
|
So, why does God cause the heavenly luminaries on day
four to perform the same action that He already completed on day one? Did the
light and darkness recombine between days one and four? What is this redundancy
hinting at? There are a few possibilities:
(1) Days one and four are
actually the same event told twice each time from a different point of emphasis
which holds much probability in light of the framework hypothesis.[xvii]
(2) The text is hinting
at a special relationship between God
and the heavenly lights, by equating their actions to God’s actions. Much like theophanic angels, the luminaries are
agents operating in God’s stead. As
is the case in other books,[xviii] perhaps these luminaries represent the angels and their roles as the
ambassadors of God. After all, Genesis is a
book of theology.
(3) God may have created all of the dividing lights on day one
when He divided light from darkness and only chose to implement them on
day four. This understanding is feasible based on the conjunct usage of the two
verbs "implement" (= עָשָה ‘āśâ) and "appoint" (= נָתַן nāṯan) in 1:16-17.
In his commentary on the Torah, the medieval commentator Rashi [xix] put forth this interpretation.
Lastly, darkness is said to have been “separated” from light. If darkness is a nonentity, how was it “separated”
from light?
§1:5.1| God called the light Day – Earth’s
illuminating force is now named "day" (= יוֹם yôm). This introduction of daylight into the existing darkness created not only a day but a means to measure time. Just as in English, the
appellation "day" not only denotes daylight itself but also one cycle of
daylight and darkness. Thus, the period of time called yôm or "day" serves as a
temporal frame for the rest of creation week reoccurring at the end of creation day (i.e. and the evening and the morning was the nth "day").
The biblical system
of reckoning days is modeled directly after what occurred on creation day one: Just as darkness was before light, so does a ceremonial day begin at the
darkening of evening when the sun has set.[xx] The darkness is then followed
by light, just as light came after darkness in the narrative. After this state of light wanes, the next
evening arrives, and concludes the day.
Alternatively, a biblical work day begins in the morning and ends when night arrives. If the advent of light in v.3 signaled the first morning, then one is justified in understanding each creation day to begin with the morning light rather than evening. The narrative allows for both methods of reckoning by its ambiguity of when the first evening and morning began. A dichotomy of reckonings is not necessary; on the contrary, the genius and beauty of this narrative shines further.
Alternatively, a biblical work day begins in the morning and ends when night arrives. If the advent of light in v.3 signaled the first morning, then one is justified in understanding each creation day to begin with the morning light rather than evening. The narrative allows for both methods of reckoning by its ambiguity of when the first evening and morning began. A dichotomy of reckonings is not necessary; on the contrary, the genius and beauty of this narrative shines further.
§1:5.2| the darkness He
called Night - The portion of a day wherein yôm is absent is
likewise given a name – "night" (= לָיְלָה lāyəlâ). Because "night" is synonymous with the primeval state known as "darkness" (= חֹשֶךְ ḥōšeḵ) from 1:2, this
reoccurring state of darkness will forever remind God’s creation of what the earth was like before He said "let there be." Perhaps the lack of light, life, and harmony in this
undefined period of primeval darkness holds the answer to why evil, death, and
misfortune come to be identified with darkness and night in other books,[xxi] cultures, and the human psyche.
To an ancient Hebrew living among peoples that worship nature, this statement would've been a powerful statement of supremacy. God here, names the abysmal blackness in the same way that Adam in Gn 2:19-20 names all animals. In both cases the verb קָרָא qārā’ is used meaning "to call" a name. But God doesn't stop there. He goes on to name the same heaven and the seas were worshiped by natives of Canaan. In fact, these non-gods were worshiped using the very names that God issued!
§1:5.3| there was evening -
The word "evening" (= עֶרֶב ‘ereḇ) is the
period of day that scripture refers to as "the sun's going."[xxii] It begins the instant the sun descends beneath the horizon to the point of
invisibility but ends when total darkness seizes the sky. Thus, an ‘ereḇ or "evening" is
only possible with the presence of light and darkness.
The first evening may have began when light was introduced. This is because initially light and darkness were simultaneously present just as occurs during ‘ereḇ. This explains the need for separating the two – see §1:4.2. And given that days begin at evening, this further reinforces the notion (discussed in §1:3.1) that day one began with the first usage of the wayyiqtol verb where the text states "And God said let there be light."
§1:5.4| and there was
morning - The word "morning" (= בֹּקֶר boqer) denotes a "seeking" or "breaking through." This is the point
of day when light breaks through the darkness and seeks out all that is not
visible.
§1:5.5| day one - Paraphrased, it maybe "one completed period of yôm (daylight)." Though yôm can
mean either "daylight" or a "day," it also can denote a longer or unspecific period
of time.[xxiii]
§1:5.6| and there was
evening, and there was morning, a day one – Here on day one, evening and
morning were first manifested because each requires light to
exist. After events are documented, the reoccurring refrain "evening … morning" concludes each creation day. This proves that day one itself was created
as the temporal model for all days thereafter.
Only after each day’s documented events, this formula occurs. God’s activities are recorded but not as
they occurred within the timeframe of the day. For example, the text never says
whether God created fish in the
evening, the morning, midday, or in anywhere between. Rather it just tells that He created them, and then at the end of day five the "evening … morning" refrain occurs as a conclusion. This narrative feature is common to all days of
creation.
Including all details in
chronological order is not what the inspired author of Genesis had in mind. This
intentional negligence is very important to note because it informs the reader
that the narrative is not meant to be read in a strict scientific or strict chronological
sense. Conversely, it is written in topical order, a method of constructing poetry that was common to the ancient near east.[xxiv] In doing
so, this supremely crafted work employs rhetorical parallelisms, doublets,
layers of chiasmi,[xxv] and other literary devices. These masterful arrangements will be diagrammed
in a future post ('בעזרת ה).
Baruch Adonai
[i] See entry 1431 בָּרָא Brown, Driver, Briggs, Hebrew and English Lexicon
(Unabridged) p. 135. In a few occurrences of בָּרָא bārā’ the question of its function is arguable (cf. Is 42:5 &
45:7). However, the creation week’s usage of this verb is not debatable. It, like
all other ancient near-eastern cosmogonies, is concerned with order being
achieved from chaos. This first requires something to exist. This idea of creatio
ex materia becomes more apparent in Gn 1:1-2:3 as shall be demonstrated.
[ii] The word בָּרָא bārā’ is used to describe the forming of man (1:27 also cf. 2:7)
and the work which God formed to perform during creation week (2:3-4).
[iii] See the Babylonian Enuma Elish, the Akkadian Atrahasis,
and the Egyptian story of Nun.
[v] Within Biblical Hebrew narratives, it is typical for a
character or object (nouns) with a name to be introduced as indefinite and then
afterward referred to as definite. For example, the appellations "heaven" and "earth" are introduced as indefinite, proper nouns (names) on days two and three – e.g. "God
called the firmament heavens (= שָׁמַים)"
(1:8). But after their introduction, they are always joined to the
definite article-particle – e.g. "God
said let there be light in the firmament of the heavens (= הַשָּׁמַיִם)" (1:14). Though there
are few exceptions to this way of operating, it remains generally true. Survey
these from their first occurrences onward: "light" = אוֹר (Gn 1:3), "luminaries" = מְאֹרֹת (Gn
1:14-15), "mankind" = אָדָם (Gn 1:26),
"woman" = אִשָׁה (Gn 2:22-23), inter alia.
[vi] An anachronism is an event that is chronologically
misplaced or out of order -- cf. Gn 14:14 where the territory of Dan is referred
to but had not yet existed until Jo 18-19.
[vii] The
past-perfect verbal form denotes an occurrence in the distant past
preceding some other action.
[viii] See Jb 10:21, 15:22-23, 30, 17:13; Ps 35:6, 88:11-12;
Prv 2:13; Eccl 11:8; Is 5:20; Jer 13:16.
[ix] Scripture purposely neglects details at times. For example, Gn 4:14 records Cain's fear that anyone finding him would slay him. The text never identifies the would-be murderer. As another example, Gn 5:4 demonstrates how unimportant the details of Adam's other children are. It merely mentions their existence in passing. What were their names, their childrens' names, their ages, their wives' names, and so on? Did Adam's wife Eve ever die? The Hebrew Bible is rife with questions like these. Lastly, an example in the NT from Mt 1:1-17 clearly omits individuals in the genealogical
record that spans from Abraham to Jesus. This is for the purpose of arriving at an even 42 generations, a number that divides into 3 groups of 14 persons. There is mystical meaning behind this.
[x] While there are different kinds, generally a parallelism is a set of two or more words or constructions that occur together, each expressing the same thought. Psalm 119:105 exhibits a parallelism: "Your word is a lamp to my feet and a light to my path." Here, the same thought is expressed twice where "a lamp" = "a light" and "my feet" = "my path." For an overview of this subject visit this page: http://loveintruth.com/psalms/3-hebrew-poetry
[xi] The terms "deep(ness)" (= תְּהוֹם təhôm) and "waters" (= מַיִם mayim) parallel frequently. See Jb 38:30; Is 51:10, 63:12-13; Ez
26:19, 31:4.
[xii] Contrastive or antithetical parallelism is a literary
device that juxtaposes opposite ideas to emphasize differences or a greater
concept. The divisions of the parallelism will sometimes share common
components or words thus linking them. For examples see Ps 1:6, 34:10; Prv
10:1, 14:20.
[xiii] Genesis 1:3, 6, 9, 11, 14, 15, 20, 22, 24, 26
[xiv] Apart from light, everything is "created" or "made" by God or otherwise brought forth by the
earth or sea. Of the ten utterances, two are followed by the verb בָּרָא bārā’ and three by the verb עָשָׂה ‘āśâ with the former often rendered as "created" (1:21,
27) and the latter as "made" (1:7, 16, 25). Both of these verbs denote creating from an
already existing matter. Light simply manifested upon command. Refer to the note [xvi] below for details on the verb עָשָׂה ‘āśâ.
[xv] "Light" (= אוֹר) occurs in numerous doublets and scriptures as a
synonym for life and resurrection.
Examples include Jb 3:20, 33:28; Ps 27:1, 36:9, 56:13;
Prv 6:23; Jn 1:4, 8:12; 1 Thes 5:5; 1 Tm 6:16.
[xvi] The verb עָשָׂה‘āśâ when used to describe creation denotes formation from an
already existing matter in an even stricter sense than בָּרָא bārā’. The verb עָשָׂה‘āśâ typically means to "do", "implement", or "perform." But at times, it means to "make" as is found in
the KJV (i.e. Gn 1:16). What decides its function in Gn 1 is context as in vv. 7 and 25.
[xvii] The framework
hypothesis is an interpretation of the first chapter of
the Book of Genesis which holds that the seven-day creation account found therein is not a literal or scientific description of the origins of the universe; rather, it is an ancient religious text which outlines a theology of creation. The seven day "framework" is therefore not meant to be
chronological but is a literary or symbolic structure designed to reinforce the purposefulness of God in creation and the Sabbath commandment. (source:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Framework_interpretation_(Genesis))
[xviii] In these places, heavenly messengers or 'angels' are referred to as stars: Jb 38:7; Dn 8:10, 12:3; 1 En 86:1-6, 88:1-3; Rv 9:1. Moreover, here are some cases of messengers acting as God: Gn 16:10; 31:11-13; Ex 3:2, 4, and 6.
[xix] Rashi (Rabbi Shlomo Yitzchaki) was an eleventh
century Talmudic and biblical scholar that many religious Jews hold to be the
premier commentator of all time.
[xx] In the instructions for observing the Day of Atonement, we are told to reckon the day from "evening until evening" (Lv 23:32). Also, the Passover is offered "between the two evenings" (Ex 12:6 & Lv 23:5).
An evening
begins at sunset and also begins a new day that last 24 hours until the next
evening arrives. Also see Dn 8:14 where twenty-three hundred "evenings and
mornings" denote days. Alternatively, it should be stated that some scholars suggest that the "evening … morning" formula may reflect a morning to morning reckoning system as observed by the ancient Egyptians.
[xxi] See Jb 10:22, 12:22, 17:13, 30:26; Is 5:20, 45:7; Jer
13:16, Mt 4:16; Rom 13:12; Eph 6:11-12; 1 Thes 5:5; 1 En 41:8,
63:11, 94:9, 107:2.
[xxii] Deuteronomy 16:6 commands the Passover be slaughtered בָּעָרֶב כְּבוֹא הַשֶּמֶשׁ "in the evening as the sun goes." 2 Chronicles 18:34 parallels עַד־הָעָרֶב "until the evening" with לְעֵת בֹּוא הַשָּׁמֶשׁ "at the time of the going of the sun."
[xxiii] See this word’s usage in Gn 2:17, 4:3 & Jer 28:11.
[xxiv] Many are not familiar with the notion of the Hebrew
Bible תנ״ך arranging ideas, stories, and
events, by order of topic rather than chronologically. This phenomenon is well
documented in the book of Jeremiah where events occur out of chronological
order. Such a style of writing reflects a sense of logic that was common in the
ancient east and one that differs from western philosophy. Oh how easy it can be for a occidental to read an oriental book and have everything including the pages
backwards. For an explanation see this excellent article: http://www.Godward.org/Hebrew%20Roots/hebrew_mind_vs__the_western_mind.htm
[xxv] A chiasm (alt. "chiasmus" pl. "chiasmi") is a rhetorical device in which an expression is divided into two parts with the word
order of the second half reversed resulting in each part mirroring the other (e.g.
ABC|C'B'A').
The
Hebrew Bible is replete with these devices. One such example is the command of
equal justice God gave to Noah in Gn
9:6a. For clarification, the translation is literal:
שׁפך דם האדם באדם דמו ישׁפך
one shedding the blood of mankind by mankind
his blood will be shed
No comments:
Post a Comment