Genesis 1 and 2: The Difference Between Created and Formed

Arach,By the way. I went too far to provoke you. I'm sorry. I do not change the text. That is the first thing. I interpret the meaning of ASAH to mean something other than that on the fourth day God created the sun, moon, and stars out of nothing.That is interpretation. That is not changing the text.Now let me ask you this:If ASAH does not mean create out of nothing AND the seer could not see the sun, moon, and stars until the fourth day, then why would this statment be a false one -"And God made two great light-bearers, the greater light-bearer to rule the day and the lesser light-bearer to rule the night, and the stars. And God set them in the expanse of the heaven to give light on the earth and to rule over the day and over the night ... And there was evening and there was, a fourth day"Again my question is can this statement be true if the sun or moon or stars existed before the fourth day, if ASAH does not mean to create out of nothing?If ASAH does not mean create something out of nothing, then why should this passage not be thought of as conveying something possible?Edited by jaywill, : No reason given.Edited by jaywill, : No reason given.

Arach, Oh Okay. Let's try it this way.If the prophet could not see the sun because of thick nebulous haze overhead, and he or we have no idea as to the sun's state of existence, and gradually the outline of the sun appears to him, how we do not know - then is it true that he saw God making [ ASAH] the sun?Again we don't know whether it was materially in the universe or not. We only see God "making" it as it being made distinguishable. Then can we say that means God made the sun on the fourth day?I think a Yes or a No will do it. For making charges of erecting strawmen it is funny that you turn around and make one yourself. I believe it is about creation and restoration with further creation."In the beginning God created [BARA] the heavens and the earth" Genesis 1:1That's about creation. His creating the life of man and the life of the sea creatures and the other life used with the word BARA is certainly about creation.If there is an eterval of time between "In the beginning" and the first day, I still think it is an account of creation and restoration.

Psalm 104:19 says "He appointed the moon for seasons". So Genesis 1:16 seems more a reference to God appointing of the sun, moon and stars as time markers for man and for signs for man.That is ASAH being used to give the quite legitimate meaning of giving a new role to something already in existence.I don't think this understanding takes away the overall concept of the Creator God being the ultimate source of all the creation.Edited by jaywill, : No reason given.Edited by jaywill, : No reason given.

I gave plenty of reasons which I think are sufficient. You don't like me to refer to the Bible as a whole. You don't like me to refer to other parts of the Bible to supply those reasons.You talk about context. But you don't want to include the rest of the Bible as context.

On the contrary. I am saying that under inspiration of God the prophet used words which made an account even truer than he could imagine. Okay then we seem to not have any argument then.We can be ignorant of the material existence of the body known as the sun previous to day four. From the seer's standpoint all we know is that for all practical purposes it was made when he SAW it.Are you sure you agree? Did I hear you right?Here again is the question in which you seem to answer in the affirmative: You say Edited by jaywill, : No reason given.

What sentence in Genesis chapter one shows the initial creation of land?

How many acceptable readings are there concerning the sun, moon, and stars being made on the fourth day? Do we also have a choice there?The land existing before the creation makes no sense and seems to violate everything you have been arguing about concerning the nature of the writing.The land being created waste and void under the water is more logical. But it is not the only choice left.And if we consult a Psalm concerning creation, Psalm 104, we see God establishing land and then covering it with water. And this is followed by Him causing the land to rise up from underneath the water."He establishes the earth upon its foundation, So that it cannot be moved forever and ever. (v. 5)
You covered it with the deep as with a garment; The waters stood above the mountains. (v. 6)
At Your rebuke they fled; At the voice of Your thunder they rushed away - (v.7)
The mountains rose, the valleys sank - To the place that You established for them (v.8)
You set a border that they may not pass over, That they may not turn back to cover the earth. (v.9)The following verses speak of His care for the feeding of various animals and man.The Psalm also has God stretching forth the heavens before laying the foundation of the earth:"Bless Jehovah, O my soul. O Jehovah my God, You are very great. You are clothed with majesty and splendour, (v.1)
Wrapped with light as with a garment; You stretch out the heavens like a tent curtain. (v2)
He lays the beams of His upper chambers in the waters; He makes the clouds His chariot; He walks upon the wings of the wind. (v.3)
He makes winds His messengers, Flames of fire His ministers. (v.4)
He establishes the earth upon its foundation, So that it cannot be moved forever and ever. (v. 5)
You covered it with the deep as with a garment; The waters stood above the mountains. (v.6)So although details are not provided in Genesis 1 or in Psalm 104, elsewhere we learn of God's judgments against a powerful Anointed Cherub commited with great authority in some ancient Eden (Ezekiel 38). So a third understanding which you did not list is that the land was created when God created the heavens and the earth in verse 1. And then some time afterwards "You covered it with the deep as with a garment; The waters stood above the mountains." (Psa. 104:6)So we would understand this as refering to Genesis 1:9,10: And the following verses speak of the growth of vegetation which correspond well with Psalm 104 after verses 12 or 14. This is not necessarily true. Between the time God "stretched out the heavens like a curtain ... established the earth upon its foundations ... covered it with the deep as with a garment" something of a previous system of things gone bad may have been destroyed by divine judgment.This would have rendered the earth in the condition used by two words which are found together in two other places in the Hebrew Bible indicating divine overthrow. As Rotherham writes concerning "without form and void" in Gen. 1:2: Edited by jaywill, : No reason given.Edited by jaywill, : No reason given.Edited by jaywill, : No reason given.Edited by jaywill, : spellingEdited by jaywill, : No reason given.

But there are people who will say "Yes, I assure you of 100% objectivity in this understanding." But they are not 100% objective but opinionated subjectively also.And I challenge that you don't have to believe in order to understand the Bible. Can you explain what the prophet Daniel meant when he wrote this about the prophecy which he wrote?"And He said, Go your way, Daniel, for the words are shut up and sealed until the time of the end.

​

Many will be purified, cleansed, and refined, but the wicked will act wickedly; and none of the wicked will understand, but those who have insight will understand." (Daniel 12:9,10)Here the Bible draws a distinction between the wicked and those who have insight. The wicked will not understand the words of the prophetic writing. So why don't they understand the prophetic writing then, if belief or non belief is irrelevant?Edited by jaywill, : No reason given.Edited by jaywill, : No reason given.Edited by jaywill, : No reason given.Edited by jaywill, : No reason given.

Arach, This seems to contradict the very Hebrew Scriptures themselves according to the prophet Isaiah."Linger and be astounded, Blind yourselves and be blind. They are drunk, but not with wine; They stagger but not with liquor.

​

For Jehovah has poured out upon you a spirit of deep sleep and has shut your eyes, the prophets; And heads, the seers, He has covered.

​

And all the vision will be to you like the words of a book that has been sealed, which when they give to him who is literate, saying, Please read this, he will say, I am not able to, for it is sealed." (Isaiah 29:9,10)There is a link between the moral condition of the readers of God's word and their ability to understand in the prophetic writing . It is the case that the unbelievers in God's headship over the nation were effected by being unable to understand further His word.They chose their own wisdom to the wisdom of God. And in the chapter this is said concerning the consequences:"Because this people draws near with their mouth and with their lips they honor Me, Yet they remove their heart far from Me ... And the wisdom of the wise men will perish, and the understanding of those who understand will be hidden" (See Isaiah 29:13,14)The point here is only that the Hebrew Bible itself says that some obstinate and unbelieving will be impaired in their understanding of the words of the prophets " And all the vision will be to you like the words of a book that has been sealed, which when they give to him who is literate, saying, Please read this, he will say, I am not able to, for it is sealed."Your own Hebrew Scriptures contradict your saying - Edited by jaywill, : No reason given.Edited by jaywill, : No reason given.Edited by jaywill, : No reason given.Edited by jaywill, : No reason given.Edited by jaywill, : No reason given.Edited by jaywill, : No reason given.

What then do you think of Simeon ben Jochai's comment on Genesis 1:2 and 2:4 written to represent some rabbinical opinions around the end of the first century and beginning of the second century AD: Edited by jaywill, : No reason given.Edited by jaywill, : No reason given.

You don't think that Jacob's twelve blessings upon his twelve sons was prophecy?You don't think that God's promise to Abraham and Sarah of the birth of Isaac was prophecy?You don't think that God's prediction that Abraham's descendents would be 400 years in bondage in chapter 15 was prophecy? Edited by jaywill, : No reason given.Edited by AdminPD, : Off Topic Warning

I'm glad you recognize then that some who fluently read ancient Hebrew do have a different understanding of Genesis chapter one than what you present.It seemed that for a while your tone was "Of course all who know Hebrew agree with me on Genesis in every respect." Edited by jaywill, : No reason given.

Arach, Arach, isn't this a tad arrogant of you to sigh like Rotherham didn't know what he was writing?Dr. Joseph Bryant Rotherham translated the entire Old Testament from the original Hebrew and Chaldee and it can be obtained in "The Emphasized Bible" published by Kregel. The inside cover reads: I would definitely consider its footnotes to be targeted at the seminary trained level audience as far as technicalities are concerned.Have you translated the entire Hebrew Bible and published your version?I think its a tad arrogant of you to be dismissive of this Bible and its translator's notes?Edited by jaywill, : No reason given.Edited by jaywill, : No reason given.Edited by jaywill, : No reason given.Edited by jaywill, : wrong wording

Arach, First of all in my quoting of Rotherham's notes there are symbols which I am not able to produce on my keyboard.These symbols probably would bring out more of the pronunciation issues. Fault me for inadaquately quoting the translator then. The accent marks I omitted from my quotation.As for time. I think you're far too busy with little Internet arguments to do this kind of heavy duty scholarly work.
Edited by jaywill, : No reason given.Edited by jaywill, : No reason given.Edited by jaywill, : No reason given.

Suppose the writer was German and the w sounds like v to him?For example Richard Wagner sounds like Richard Vagner to non Germans.