KCBid,
Suppose instead of Gen 1:1 being the first act God performed that instead it is a summary of what the text following it is going to explain in more detail. Notice how 2:4 appears to restate Gen 1:1 and resummerises the end of the story which explained how God created "the heavens and the earth".
This will not work, because verse one is tied to verse two. Genesis 1:1 is the first act of creation and it is linked by a
waw disjunctive to verse two, which gives a description of the earth which was just formed. The first verse is a
merism which describes the creation of the whole universe (stars, galaxies, etc).
I believe this is backed by a correct translation of Genesis 2:3. Unlike what many translations state “
God created and made,” this verse actually ends with “
…in it He rested from all His work which God created to make.” So after the earth’s creation, God
asa, made or transformed it (Is. 45:18). God created the earth "In the beginning" then spent the next six "days" transforming (making) it. So, Genesis 2:3 supports the idea that we have moved from the creation of the universe and earth to the making of earth for man.
Genesis 1:2 gives us a description of the newly created earth and tells us the frame of reference (surface of the waters) from which to interpret the rest of the chapter. Most scholars have pointed out that the
waw disjunctive "and" (also called
waw copulative and
waw conjunction) of Genesis 1:2 connects it to verse one. Dr. Mark Rooker puts it this way: "…Judges 8:11 and Jonah 3:3 are more helpful parallels to the grammatical structure reflected in Genesis 1:1-2, where a finite verb is followed by a
waw disjunctive clause containing the verb…. This would confirm the traditional interpretation that verse 1 contains the main
independent clause, with Genesis 1:2 consisting of three subordinate
circumstantial clauses describing what the just-mentioned earth looked like after it was created."
Genesis 2:4 says, “These are the generations of the heavens and the earth when they [the heavens and the earth] were created, in the day the Lord God made earth and heavens.” Verse 2:4a gives us a
merism as in Genesis 1:1, reflecting back on the universe's initial creation. Genesis 2:4b, "in the day" is referring to time period during which God was transforming (making) the earth and sky, in which the "generations" (things which proceed from the original; see Gen. 5:1-32, 10:1-32, 11:10-32, etc.) were brought forth. The generations are the light, expanse, seas, land, plants, lights, animals and man.
Lastly, there is the phrase “and was evening and was morning” at the end of each day’s description. This phrase is used to designate the brackets for each work period. Evening was the time when days transitioned from one to another. It was a period of resting from the previous day’s work. The morning began the current period of work (Psalm 104:22-23). So, each day started with the transition “and was evening” and then began the work period “and was morning.” This makes sense of the fact that day one starts with “and was evening…” and yet it is not introduced until after “And God said” of verse three. The phrase was used here to close off the period designated “In the beginning.” Again, this points away from Genesis 1:1 being a summary and instead to it being the first act of creation.
Professor Ellen van Wolde, a world acclaimed Old Testament scholar... ...looked at the first line of Genesis that reads “in the beginning God created the Heaven and the Earth” and found that the Hebrew text had been translated incorrectly. The proper translation, she argues, is that the Earth was already there when God created humans and animals. The use of bara she argues was “meant to say that God did create humans and animals, but not the Earth itself.” She concludes “[t]he traditional view of God the Creator is untenable now.”
http://jonathanturley.org/2009/10/18/cr ... f-genesis/
Just as I thought, she got this idea from other Ancient Near Eastern creation myths. Many skeptics and liberals do this. They try to make the Bible mimic manmade myths. Anyone who has ever read these myths knows that Genesis is very different.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/religio ... demic.html
She also says that because there are two subjects mentioned as being "created," that
bara here should mean separated. She admits that
bara means "to create," but felt that something was wrong. Again, she looks to other myths. She also misses the fact that most scholars believe that "the heavens and the earth" is a
merism describing a single concept (the universe).
Lastly, Genesis one consistently uses a single word for separate/divide (
badal). It is used in Genesis 1:4, 6, 7, 14 and 18). Why was this word not used if, as Professor Wolde suggests, the intended meaning of Genesis 1:1 was that heaven and earth were separated.
Pro 8:22 The LORD possessed me in the beginning of his way, before his works of old.
Pro 8:23 I was set up from everlasting, from the beginning, or ever the earth was.
Pro 8:24 When there were no depths, I was brought forth...
Christ could not have been 'set up' or 'brought forth 'from everlasting' if time didn't exist since everlasting defines the existence of infinite time.
This is not about Christ; it is about wisdom (an attribute).
Proverbs 7:4
"Say to
wisdom, "You are my sister," And call understanding your intimate friend;"
Proverbs 8
"1 Does not
wisdom call, And understanding lift up
her voice?
2 On top of the heights beside the way, Where the paths meet,
she takes her stand;
3 Beside the gates, at the opening to the city, At the entrance of the doors,
she cries out:"
(Also see verses 5,11, 12, 14)
Proverbs 9:1
"
Wisdom has built
her house,
She has hewn out
her seven pillars;"