Genesis 1:1-3

I'm not sure that the culture of Gen 1 was directly dependant on the culture that gave us Gen 2 and would go so far as to say that the culture of Gen 1 reflects a major shift, change from the culture of gen 2.In Gen 2 we see a very local, parochial view of creation. It is very similar to many other creation myths with no detail. It starts with: and then moves on to bigger and better things. It deals with the things very early man dealt with, fields and streams and rain and tilling the soil.The Gen 1 account seems to be from a later, more sophisticated culture. It pushes more detail into the story. It tries to explain the stars and moon and sun and heavens. It tries to describe how the things that just are in Gen 2, came about.

---

Aslan is not a Tame Lion

Or Genesis 2 is from a newer culture arising in the hill country and trying to piggyback Midrash atop an older Semitic Cosmology, or the abrupt refocus on the earth and Adam and Eve was akward redaction, or ...Your interpretation may be perfectly right ... or not.

i think i can forward a guess: i think genesis is based on earlier traditions, but the culture that wrote it probably thought god created the void as well. i think you can pick up hints from the other contemporary books of the bible.

---

אָרַח

i don't give much thought to such kinds of hebrew mysticism and tradition. genesis starts with "bet" because that's the character that signifies of, in, or at.the word for "beginning" is ראשית (rashit) but if i wanted to say "in the beginning" i would write בראשית. ב- simply means "in-". it's standard to but that sort of prepositional word at the beginning of a sentance.the stylistic thing i think is more important is the kind of repition between בראשית and the very next word, created: ברא"create" and "in the beginning" fit together perfectly, "create" is part of the word "in the beginning." i dunno if that MEANS anything, but its aestheticly pleasing to me.

---

אָרַח

no no jar, that's the tail end of genesis 1. the second half of that verse begins chapter 2. genesis 1 refers to "the heaven and the earth" and genesis 2 refers to "the earth and the heaven."This message has been edited by arachnophilia, 11-13-2005 12:17 AM

---

אָרַח

correct

---

Aslan is not a Tame Lion

Most who've read much of me are aware that I am not a YEC based on my understanding of these first verses of Genesis. Genesis 1:1 simply states that when the heavens and the earth were created, God created them. Only when God began to work on the void planet did day one begin. So my position on the creation verses of Genesis one is that nobody knows the age of the earth for sure. Likely it is relatively old. This, imo, is where my fellow Biblical creationist YECs get themselves in trouble.This is not the only problem YECs have here. Most also believe the heavens in verse on include the whole universe and that not only the earth, but the whole universe is very young; about 6000 years old. This leaves them looking very foolish for two reasons:1. If the whole universe were only 6000 years old and the term universe means everything existing, where was God and what was he doing for all the eons of eternity past before the universe was created. If he is the same yesterday, today and forever, as the Scripture claims, my YEC friends have a big problem.2. The universe is just too massive and complex to make any sense out of it being a few thousand years old.But wait. Even big bang creos have basically the same problem. Why? Because, with God, 15 billion years is analogious to the wink of the eye relative to eternity. So if the BB is their cup of tea, they still have this big, big problem of where God was before and what was he doing with nothing around him for the eons of eternity before?This is why I see Genesis one the way I do. My buzsaw hypothesis is that the universe had no beginning and will never end. It is as eternal as God, who has been eternally creating, reaaranging, managing and destroying things in his universe at will. No other hypothesis that I know of satiisfies the thermodynamic laws of the universe as well as this, since the Biblical scriptures state that all things came from God and in him all things exist. Thus the all powerful/energetic supreme God (Jehovah) of the universe is the source of all energy and matter. When anything was created by him, energy came forth from his being to create.The earth, as well as all the rest of the universe, except the rest of our Solar System were likely created, each in their own time before day four when the sun, moon and likely the rest of our Solar System were created. Since the sun and moon were to determine the days, years, et al, nobody knows how long days one, two, three or four were. The 24 hour day likely began on day five.Edited to clarify the last paragraph.This message has been edited by buzsaw, 11-14-2005 12:35 AM

---

The immeasurable present is forever consuming the eternal future and extending the infinite past. buzsaw

Buzz, interesting idea, but can we not also say that along with energy and matter, God also created and creates time. In other words, to ask what God was doing before the world was created suggests that God, like us, is limited as temporal being.I hate to appeal to TV, but this idea can be illustrated by the people that live in the wormhole in Deep Space Nine. They are not temporal beings in the sense they do not exist only in linear time, but at all points of time equally. Now, of course, they are mere science fiction fantasy, but if you've watched the show, you can at least see that it is possible to imagine and even depict existence that is not linearly temporal.It seems to me your idea falls down a little on that point. Time itself has a beginning, and that beginning is the word of God (note where Jesus says "I am the beginning"). So the beginning and reality is not just a thing. It is a Person.

Hi Randman. I believe time would be relative to each body, event and thing created and coming to pass. So as per Genesis one, In the beginning........In the beginning of what, is the question. Answer: In the beginning of the work done on the void earth and in the beginning of the heavens, et al relative to and needful for planet earth.The statement of Jesus of which you cite is found in Revelation 1:8, Rev 21:6 and 22:13. These statements of Jesus appear to be asserting that when each and every thing/event began and when each end, he exists in one form or another, either in the Holy Spirit, from whom he was born a man or as the man Jesus when he was born of the virgin via the Holy Spirit of Jehovah, supreme god of the universe. As with the Father, he is the I Am, the existing one (meaning of the name, Jehovah/YHWH)Edited to add Biblical references: Colossians 1:16,17: This message has been edited by buzsaw, 11-14-2005 01:12 AM

---

The immeasurable present is forever consuming the eternal future and extending the infinite past. buzsaw

I think He is more specifically stating the word of God is the beginning and end of all things; that He as the Word, is what creates or originates all things, which was not a radically novel idea, but the idea that the Word is also the end of all things is perhaps a bit of a revelation, even for people today.This message has been edited by randman, 11-14-2005 01:06 AM

since god creates through spoken commands in genesis 1, it is fair to say that is a good analysis. the origin of "the word" can be found in one of the aramaic targums, which refers to god as the word meaning "to speak."

---

אָרַח

The doctrine of the trinity comes to play here. Note that I edited in Colosians 1:16, 17 at the end of my last post. Both Greek texts from which most translations originated have it "created through him," and not "created by him." It was Jehovah, the father who sent forth his Holy Spirit to do the actual work, the Holy Spirit being the multipresent entity of the trinity. Jesus came forth from that Holy Spirit, spirit of both the father and the son. Thus, imo, the "through" and not the "by." See Psalms 104, about verse 30 or so for the reference where God sends forth his spirit to do the work of creating in the universe.Gotta hit hay. g'nite/morning.

---

The immeasurable present is forever consuming the eternal future and extending the infinite past. buzsaw

The "or originates" was my attempt to explain it either way. God is One so I think it's deeper than what this thread can get into.My point is the same whether by or through or whatever. The idea is the beginning is the Word who is Jesus Christ, and so the End. All things come into being by the Word, and this is a little deep, but all things have at their root, the Word, imo.Think of it this way. If you said, Joe Wilson be, and Joe Wilson was, then the root of Joe Wilson is God's word "Joe Wilson" not that Joe Wilson himself is the word of God in the sense of being the Christ, Jesus of Nazareth, hung on a Cross, etc,....but the root identity of Joe are the words from God "Joe Wilson" and in that place the word of God and Joe Wilson are one, and really when it is all boiled away, not only will the beginning of Joe Wilson be that Light that lights every man that comes into the world, but the end will one day be that same Light also. He is the All in all.Btw, that doesn't mean hell isn't real, but maybe we are getting off-topic here.

buzsaw, randman:Respectfully, what each of you believe is entirely irrelevant to the topic, that topic being the intended communication of B'reishit (Genesis) 1:1-3. Please pursue your Christian apologetics elsewhare.

Midrash tells us how Jewish sages perceived the text; to dismiss it impresses me as sophomoric. So, for example, a Midrash that cautions us "not to speculate on the origins of God or what may have existed before Creation" suggests a recognition that the opening lines of Genesis are conducive to such speculation. This, in turn, serves as evidence supporting the Etz Hayim translation against, for example, that found in the 1917 JPS Tanakh, which is precisely why the Etz Hayim commentary references it.