Bereshit bara Elohim et hashamayim ve'et ha'arets.
The Hebrew word for "beginning is bereshith. The first word in the original Hebrew is בְּרֵאשִׁית, transliterated as Bereishit, B'reishit, or Breishis. In Judaism it begins the Torah portion (parshah) Bereishit, which ends at Genesis 5:31. In Hebrew, בְּרֵאשִׁית translates literally as "At/in [a] head [of]," implying "in [a] beginning." The three middle letters of the Hebrew alphabet within the word בְּרֵאשִׁית, Bereishit, are ר, א, and ש, which are pronounced as reish when part of the word, but can also be read as rosh when read without the vowels. Rosh is the word for "head" as spelled and pronounced in Hebrew (as in Rosh Hashanah, ראש השנה, ro'sh hash-shānāh, "the head (beginning) [of] the year").
The Hebrew word for "God" is Elohim. In the Hebrew Bible Elohim, when meaning the God of Israel, is mostly grammatically singular. Even in Genesis 1:26 "Then God said (singular verb), 'Let us make (plural verb) man in our image, after our likeness'." Elohim is singular. Gesenius and other Hebrew grammarians traditionally described this as the pluralis excellentiae (plural of excellence), which is similar to the pluralis majestatis (plural of majesty, or "Royal we").
The word "bara" does not mean "create" (Hebrew actually has no word that means "create" in the sense of something out of nothing) but "to fatten". If we take the literal definition of "bara" in Genesis 1.1 we have - In the beginning God fattened the heavens and the earth. What does this fattening of the heavens and the earth mean? This verse is not showing the creation of the heaven and earth, but rather the fattening or filling up of it. Therefore, Genesis 1.1 is a condensed version of teh whole creation story.
The Hebrew word for "heaven" is shemayim and is plural in form. Therefore, it would be more correctly translated "God created the heavens and the earth." Shamayim comes from shameh, a root meaning to be lofty. It literally means the sky. "Shamayim" is a crucial concept in the Bible. There are at least three different shamayim or "heavens" in the Bible. 1.) The atmosphere where birds fly and clouds wander above the earth; 2.) The heaven where the celestial bodies wander (wandering stars = planets) and stars reside; 3.) The heaven where God and "the hosts of heaven" reside - a spiritual dimension outside earth's spacetime (Psalm 90:4; Peter 3:8; Isaiah 57:15) also called "paradise", the "heaven of heavens", or in Hebrew Shamaui h'shamayim in scripture (cf. Deut. 10:14; 1Ki 8:27, 2Ch 2:6, 6:18; Neh 9:6).
The Hebrew word for "earth" is erets and is not only used to denote the entire planet earth, but it is also used for its componen parts, such as land, country, ground, and soil. For example, when God called Abram, He said to him, "Get out of your country (erets)" (Genesis 12:1). Then Genesis 11:28 says that the "land" (erets) of his nativity was Ur of Chaldees. The land (erets) of Abram was a land of idolatry, which had its spiritual geographical place, but He was also calling him out from under a spiritual influence. A few other examples are: "the land (erets) of the Philistines" (Genesis 21:32); "the land (erets) of Edom" (Genesis 36:16); and the list goes on - the land of Moab, Ammon, Hittites, etc. What a particular people were - their customs, their religious beliefs, and their various characteristics - pervaded in their land. The Moabite spirit pervaded in the erets of Moab, the Edomite spirit pervaded in the erets of Edom, and so forth.
1.1 At the head [of all things], [is God the] Elohim [: a complete and total being who] filled the [three] heavens and [all of] the land.
1:2 And the earth was without form, and void; and darkness [was] upon the face of the deep. And the Spirit of God moved upon the face of the waters.
Veha'arets hayetah tohu vavohu vechoshech al-peney tehom veruach Elohim merachefet al-peney hamayim.
The ruin-and-reconstruction theory (also called the "gap theory") places a gap of indeterminate time between the first two verses of Genesis Chapter One. This supposed “gap” has been used to try to harmonize the Bible with the supposed millions of years of the geologic record. “Gappists” translate “the earth was without form and empty” as “the earth became [or, ‘had become’] without form and empty.” At stake is the translation of the Hebrew word hayetah (a form of the Hebrew verb, hayah, “to be”). Custance claims that out of 1,320 occurrences of the verb hayah in the Old Testament, only 24 can certainly be said to bear the meaning “to be.” He concludes that in Genesis 1:2 hayetah must mean “became” and not simply “was.” Note again that the meaning of a word is controlled by its context, and that in the previous section we showed that verse 2 is circumstantial to verse 1. Thus, “was” is the most natural and appropriate translation for hayetah. It is rendered this way in most English versions (as well as the LXX). Furthermore, in Genesis 1:2 hayetah is not followed by the preposition le, which would have removed any ambiguity in the Hebrew and required the translation “became.”
The phrase traditionally translated in English "without form and void" is tōhû wābōhû (Hebrew: תֹהוּ וָבֹהוּ). The Greek Septuagint (LXX) rendered this term as "unseen and unformed" (Greek: ἀόρατος καὶ ἀκατασκεύαστος), paralleling the Greek concept of Chaos. In the Hebrew Bible, the phrase is a dis legomenon, being used only in one other place. [Jer. 4:23]. There Jeremiah is telling Israel that sin and rebellion against God will lead to "darkness and chaos," or to "de-creation," "as if the earth had been ‘uncreated.’". Modern Christian scholars maintain the doctrine of creation "ex nihilo" to imply that God had created the world out of nothing, implying a similar meaning to the ancient Greek word Chaos. It is usually translated "formless and empty," or some variation of the same, and describes the condition of the earth before God said, "Let there be light." Precise translation of the phrase is difficult, as only the first word, "tohu," appears to have any independent meaning. "Tohu," is used 20 times in the Hebrew bible, and is used to mean "vain" or "waste." "Bohu" appears only three times in the Hebrew bible, always together with "tohu," and always quoting the Genesis verse. It therefore may have no meaning at all, being a nonsense word whose only purpose is aesthetic, to rhyme with "tohu." Finally, Flavius Josephus describes Verse Two as the following: "But when the earth did not come into sight, but was covered with thick darkness, and a wind moved upon its surface.."
E.J. Young expounds the meaning of tohu wabohu in a manner that is both simpler and saner, as follows: To determine the significance of [tohu] in Genesis 1:2 is not particularly difficult. In Isaiah 45:18 it is used as a contrast to the phrase "to be inhabited". According to this verse God did not create for desolation, but rather to be inhabited. An earth of [tohu] therefore is an earth that cannot be inhabited. Such an earth has not fulfilled the purpose for which it was created; it is an earth created in vain, a desolate earth. If, therefore, we translate as "desolation", we shall probably be doing justice to the word. Likewise, the similar sounding [wabohu] apparently signifies something uninhabitable, and we may render it as "waste". Jeremiah uses this striking combination when describing the land of Palestine after it has been devestated by the invasion of Nebuchadnezzar's armies. At that time the land will become what it was at the beginning, a desolation and waste, so that man will no longer dwell therein. This is stressed in that the prophet depicts the birds as having flown away, the mountains being removed, and the cities uprooted. On such an earth man cannot live. It is that thought which is also expressed in Genesis. The earth was in such a condition that man would have been unable to live thereon.
Desolation: the state of being decayed or destroyed; a sadness from being forsaken or abandoned.
Waste: barren, an unhabited wilderness.
Considering the evidence presented, we can affirm that the Ugaritic term "thw" is a cognate of the Hebrew "tohu" and both have a common meaning: "desert." They are probably nouns with a common Semitic root, "thw." In relation to this, Huehnergard points out that the text or alphabetical form "thw" is probably /tuhwu/ "wasteland."
The etymology of bohu has been explained through the Arabic bahiya, "to be hollow, empty." This Arabic term is used to describe the "empty" state of a store or house that has little or nothing in it. Therefore, its meaning is more concrete than abstract, "nothing, empty."
http://faculty.gordon.edu/hu/bi/Ted_Hildebrandt/OTeSources/01-Genesis/Text/Articles-Books/Ouro_Gen1_2Abiotic_AUSS.pdf
1.2a And the land was [two fold: both like a desert,] an uninhabitable desolation and [at the same time hollow, like] an empty waste;
The etymology of bohu has been explained through the Arabic bahiya, "to be hollow, empty." This Arabic term is used to describe the "empty" state of a store or house that has little or nothing in it. Therefore, its meaning is more concrete than abstract, "nothing, empty."
http://faculty.gordon.edu/hu/bi/Ted_Hildebrandt/OTeSources/01-Genesis/Text/Articles-Books/Ouro_Gen1_2Abiotic_AUSS.pdf
1.2a And the land was [two fold: both like a desert,] an uninhabitable desolation and [at the same time hollow, like] an empty waste;
Choshek is the Hebrew equivelent in most regards to the English word usually rendered darkness, or void of light, obscured: like a hidden place in a dark area. Past studied tended to see in Genesis 1 an antagonism between light and darkness, the scheme of Marduk's fight against the monster of chaos that is described in Babylonian creation myth. It must be emphasized that nowhere in the Old Testament is mention of a battle or dualism between light and darkness. Neither is the primeval ocean or darkness considered a chaotic power or mythical enemy of God. God is the creator of both light and darkness (Isa 45:7); his kindness transcends the antithesis of light and darkness (Ps 139:12). E.J. Young indicates that darkness in Genesis 1:2 was merely one characteristic of the unformed earth. Man could not live in darkness, and the first step in making the earth habitable was the removal of darkness. Moreover, Young presents the theological meaning of darkness by stating that God named the darkness, just as he did light. Both are therefore good and well-pleasing to him; both are created, and both serve his purpose, making up the day. Thus, darkness is recognized in Genesis 1 as a positive good for man.
The word “face” has a variety of meanings. It is used literally to refer to the face of man or animals (Genesis 30:40), seraphim (Isaiah 6:2), and the face of Christ (Matthew 17:2). Figuratively, it is used in reference to the face of the earth (Genesis 1:29), waters (Genesis 1:2), sky (Matthew 16:3), and moon (Job 26:9). Also, the word “face” is used theologically with regard to the “presence of God” (Genesis 30:17-23). Face may be the physical “face” or the surface seen. Being “face to face” (literally, “eye to eye”) is being squared off with each other, front to front, and fully visible (Numbers 14:14). The face (eye) of the earth is the visible surface of the earth (Exodus 10:5, Exodus 10:15), and the face of the waters is that surface which is seen (Genesis 1:2). The word “face” may stand for the entire countenance. It is in the face that the emotions are expressed. The face of the sky expresses the weather, stormy and red, or fair (Matthew 16:2-3).
Al-pene is a preposition + masculine plural noun construct which means "face... surface, upon the face of the deep," "face" = visible side: surface, pene tehom, pene hammayim, "face, surface." In Hebrew, as in other Semitic languages, the noun appears only in plural. Panim is one of the most frequent words in the Old Testament, appearing more than 2100 times. However, in the vast majority of the texts panim is joined to a preposition (which may be le, min, or 'al) thus making a new prepositional expression. In many such texts the nominal meaning ("face") has been lost. Panim, especially when related to concepts such as country, land, sea, and sky, means "surface" mainly in the construction of 'al-pene. The preposition 'al=pene related to concepts such as 'adama "land, ground"; 'eres "land, country"; mayim "water (Gen. 1:2); tehom "primeval abyss" (Gen 1:2) means "on (the surface of)" or towards (the surface)." This construction is important in determining the etymology and the meaning of the Hebrew word "tehom".
Al-pene is a preposition + masculine plural noun construct which means "face... surface, upon the face of the deep," "face" = visible side: surface, pene tehom, pene hammayim, "face, surface." In Hebrew, as in other Semitic languages, the noun appears only in plural. Panim is one of the most frequent words in the Old Testament, appearing more than 2100 times. However, in the vast majority of the texts panim is joined to a preposition (which may be le, min, or 'al) thus making a new prepositional expression. In many such texts the nominal meaning ("face") has been lost. Panim, especially when related to concepts such as country, land, sea, and sky, means "surface" mainly in the construction of 'al-pene. The preposition 'al=pene related to concepts such as 'adama "land, ground"; 'eres "land, country"; mayim "water (Gen. 1:2); tehom "primeval abyss" (Gen 1:2) means "on (the surface of)" or towards (the surface)." This construction is important in determining the etymology and the meaning of the Hebrew word "tehom".
Since the year 1895 many Old Testament scholars have argued that there is a definite relationship between the term "tehom" (deep) in Genesis 1:2 and "Tiamat," the Babylonian female monster of the primordial salt-water ocean in "Enuma Elish." Some scholars to the present day claim that there is in Genesis 1:2 an "echo of the old cosmogonic myth," while others deny it. The question of a philological connection between the Babylonian "Tiamat" and the Biblical tehom, "deep," has its problems. A. Heidel has argued convincingly that both words go back to a common Semitic root from which also the Babylonian term tiamtu, tamtu, meaning "ocean, sea," is derived. Additional evidence for this has come from Ugarit where the word thm/thmt, meaning "ocean, deep, sea," has come to light, and from Arabic "Tihamatu" or "Tihama" which is the name for the low-lying Arabian coastal land. On this basis there is a growing consensus of opinion that the Biblical term "tehom" and the Babylonian "Tiamat" derive from a common Semitic root. This means that the use of the word "tehom" in Genesis 1:2 cannot be used as an argument for a direct dependence on Genesis 1 on the Babyloniana "Enuma Elish." It is clearly an inanimate part of the cosmos, simply a part of the created world. The "deep" does not offer any resistance to God's creative activity. In view of these observations it is unsustainable to speak of a "demythologizing" of a mythical being in Genesis 1:2. The term "tehom" as used in verse 2 does not suggest that there is present in this usage the remnant of a latent conflict between a chaos monster and a creator god. Over against the Egyptian cosmogonic mythology contained in the Heliopolitan, Memphite, and Hermopolitan theologies, it is of significance that there is in Genesis 1:2 neither a god rising out of "tehom" to proceed with creation nor does this term express the notion of a pre-existent, personified Ocean (Nun). With T.H. Gaster it is to be observed that Genesis 1:2 "nowhere implies... that all things actually issued out of water." In short, the description of the depersonalized, undifferentiated, unorganized, and passive state of "tehom" in Genesis 1:2 is not due to any influence from non-Israelite mythology but is motivated through the Hebrew conception of the world. In stating the conditions in which this earth existed before God commanded that light should spring forth, the author of Genesis 1 rejected explicitly contemporary mythological notions. he uses the term "tehom," whose cognates are deeply mythological in their usage in ancient Near Eastern creation speculations, in such a way that it is not only non-mythical in content but antimythical in purpose.
1.2b And [all the while, a mysterious] darkness covered the surface of the [immeasurably deep] abyss.
Through the centuries of history recorded in the Old Testament, we can see a progressive
development of understanding of the identity and work of God’s Spirit. This revelation leaves
room for the fuller doctrine of the Trinity that would be revealed in the N.T., where the Spirit
continues to perform the same activity and work as found in the O.T.
The Hebrew word for spirit
The Hebrew word for spirit, “ruach” is used nearly four hundred times in the O.T. It has a variety of meanings, which have a large measure of overlap. Sometimes the meaning can be determined with reasonable certainty by the context of the passage, but in other places the meaning is not so distinct.
(i) Wind
Over a quarter of the uses of “ruach” is to describe the wind, the powerful but invisible physical force of moving air. After the flood, God made a wind blow and the waters subsided (Gen 8:1). Also, during the plagues of Egypt, God sent the east wind which brought the locusts and the west wind removed them (Ex 10:13,19). Often it describes a strong, or even violent and frightening wind. God sent a strong east wind that divided the Red Sea (Ex 14:21), and Elijah witnessed the strong wind that broke rocks on Sinai (1 Kg 19:11). The Psalmist speaks about escaping from the raging wind (Ps 55:8). In many of these passages, the wind is described as coming from God, or being sent by God, so it can be understood as more than merely a physical wind. Jesus also drew a parallel between the wind and those born of the Spirit when he spoke to Nicodemus (Jn 3:8), as the Greek word for spirit, “pneuma”, also has a similar breadth of meanings.
(ii) Breath
Sometimes ruach describes the smaller quantity of moving air from human nostrils, or poetically, from God’s nostrils, like “the blast of the breath of God’s nostrils” (2 Sam 22:16), or “the breath of God’s mouth” (Ps 33:6). This can overlap with the following meaning, the breath of life.
(iii) Human life.
The spirit, meaning human or animal life. God sent the flood to destroy everything with the breath (ruach) of life (Gen 6:17). The Psalmist speaks of committing his spirit into the hands of God (Ps 31:5), thereby entrusting his life to God. Jesus quoted these words as his last words on the cross, when he gave up his life (Lk 23:46). Jeremiah stated that idols have no breath (ruach) in them (Jer 10:14). They have no life, especially when compared with the living God.
This spirit can be troubled, like Pharaoh after his dream (Gen 41:8), jealous (Num 5:14), angry (Ju 8:3), sullen (1 Kg 21:5), or stirred by God (1 Chr 5:26). In these cases, “ruach” is being used to describe an emotional response in a person.
(iv) The divine Spirit
In the O.T., this is often described as the Spirit of the LORD. In the N.T., he is the personal third member of the Trinity, together with the Father and the Son, Jesus.
Determining the meaning of “ruach”
In most cases it is not difficult to determine the intended meaning of ruach, whether it describes the wind, the human spirit or God’s Spirit. However, in some passages, the exact meaning can be debated. For example, in the creation account, the more familiar translation is of the Spirit of God hovering over the waters (Gen 1:2), as in the KJV or NIV. But some versions translate ruach as the wind of God (NRSV, NEB), which seems to reduce the supernatural aspect of the creation account.
In the earlier books of the O.T. revelation, little or no distinction is made between the divine and human spirit. Job states that as long as the spirit of God is in his nostrils he will not speak lies (Job 27:3), a poetic way of saying that while he was still alive he will speak the truth.
Ezekiel may have intentionally used all three meanings using a clever play on words in his vision of the dry bones (Ezek 37:1-14) . So the “ruach” was the Spirit of God who carried Ezekiel into the valley of dry bones (v1), and who will revive the house of Israel (v14). But it is also the breath that will enter the bones and give them life (v5, 10), as well as the four winds from where the breath will come from (v9).
The development in understanding of “ruach” through the O.T.
The doctrine and teaching of the Holy Spirit shows clearly the progressive nature of revelation through the Old Testament. In the early centuries, the Spirit was mostly seen as the power of God working in his creation and through his people. For example, the artistic and technical skills of Bezalel who made the tabernacle furnishings was described as him being “filled with the divine spirit” (Ex 31:3). This was because all wisdom and skill was understood to come from God. As the revelation through the O.T. progressed, God’s Spirit was described as being holy and having moral and even personal qualities.
When Ezra looked back over Israel’s history from the perspective of the return from exile, he referred twice to the working of the spirit of God. He stated that God gave his good spirit to instruct them in the wilderness (Neh 9:20), and that God had warned them by his spirit through his prophets (9:30). In the original account in the Pentateuch, there is no mention that the Spirit instructed the people. Normally it was Moses who instructed the people with the words that God had spoken to him (eg. Lev 18:1-2). This teaching role of the Spirit was not understood at the time. That revelation came later. This is similar to the role of the Spirit in the N.T. to teach and remind us of what Jesus said (John 14:26).
This open-ended function of the Spirit is reflected in the verb used to describe her action. God’s Spirit “moves,” “flutters,” or “hovers” מרחפת (merachefet) over the deep waters. The only other occurrence of the verb רחף (rachaf) in the piel is an imperfect found in Deuteronomy 32:11; “As an eagle stirs up its nest, and hovers ירחף (yerachef) over its young.” The Genesis occurrence is a piel participle, which suggests ongoing movement that never quite alights nor comes to rest. The Spirit’s presence is active, expectant, and ongoing. There is a sense of anticipation and imminent action. But that action is not fully realised in and is certainly not exhausted by the initial creation of the cosmos. That the רוח אלהים (ruach elohim) is present at creation seems clear,17 but her involvement has been over-emphasised. Eduard Schwietzer contends that the Spirit’s presence in Gen. 1:2 serves first and foremost to underscore her role as sustainer of creation.
Here [in Gen. 1:2] . . . the Spirit of God is grasped as a dynamic and creative principle. But it is not a matter only, or even principally, of the activity of God’s will completing the creation of the universe (cf. Ps. Xxxiii. 6); it is much more the fact that this dynamic force is responsible for all that is alive, for all physical life. The Spirit of God is the active principle which proceeds from God and gives life to the physical world (Gen. ii. 7).18
The primary role of the Spirit in creation as it is described both here and elsewhere in the Old Testament is not with its inception, but its continuation. “In the Old Testament,” says Derek Kidner, “the Spirit is a term for God’s ongoing energy, creative and sustaining (cf. Job 33:4; Ps. 104:30).”19 For Lyle Dabney, the Genesis account of the world’s creation “interprets the world as defined not by necessity but by possibility, that is, as fraught with the very possibility of God’s Spirit.”20 The רוח אלהים (ruach elohim) is present at the beginning, but she comes into her own as creator through the ongoing activity of sustaining and recreating life.
http://webjournals.alphacrucis.edu.au/journals/aps/issue-12/sustainer-life-role-spirit-god-creation/
Hebrew words in and of themselves often have multiple meanings, determined by placement, context, and other means which I am not qualified to expound on. For example, the Hebrew word (ברך) transliterated barack occurs in Job 1:5,11; 2:5 and means to curse God. The same word occurring in Job 1:21 as well as multiple other places means to bless God.
Hebrew words therefore have multiple English words that may be applied to them, yet only one correct word for its context. In other words you would not use the English word bless in Job 1:5,11; 2:5, because the meaning is to curse.
A look at one Hebrew word, and how it was handled in the various translations.
Strong's Number H7363 matches the Hebrew רחף (rachaph), which occurs 3 times in 3 verses.
Everyone agrees that the Hebrew word רחף occurs only three times in the Bible.
The three places it is found are in Genesis 1:2, Deuteronomy 32:11, and Jeremiah 23:9.
Tyndale translated (rachaph) as “moved” in the English in his translation in Genesis 1:2 in 1525.
The Geneva Bible translated (rachaph) as “moved” in English in 1599.
The King James Authorized Bible translated (rachaph) as “moved” in 1611.
Robert Young translated (rachaph) as “Fluttering” in 1663.
The 1881 Revised Version translated (rachaph) as “moved”.
The Revised Standard Version translated (rachaph) as “was moving” in 1952.
The NASB translated (rachaph) as “was moving” in 1971.
The NIV translated (rachaph) as “was hovering” in 1973.
The second time the Hebrew word (רחף) is used is in Deuteronomy 32:11.1525 Tyndale translates “flotereth”.
1599 Genevea Bible translates “fluttering”.
1611 KJB translates “fluttering”.
1663 Young translates “fluttereth”.
1881-1885 RV as “fluttereth”.
1952 RSV as “flutters”.
1971 NASB as “hovers”.
1973 NIV as “hovers”.
This time it is 446 years before the word used in the context of Deuteronomy 32:11 was altered. It was altered by the NASB.
The word has changed from Genesis 1:2 “moved” to Deuteronomy 32:11, “flutter” because of context. The change occurred because the subject changed from Spirit, to Eagle.
The third and final time the Hebrew word (רחף) is used. Jeremiah 23:9.1525 Tyndale did not translate this scripture evidently, as he was burned at the stake.
1599 Geneva Bible translates "shake".
1611 KJV translates “shake”.
1661 Young translates “fluttered”.
1881-1885 Revised version translates “shake”.
1952 RSV translates “shake”.
1971 NASB translates “tremble”.
1973 NIV translates “tremble”.
Comparison of usage of (רחף) in all three verses.Tyndale translates---(1) moved (2) flotereth (3) XXXXX
Geneva translates---(1) moved (2) fluttering (3) shake
KJB translates---(1) moved (2) fluttering (3) shake
Young translates---(1) fluttering (2) fluttereth (3) fluttered
1881-1885 RV translates---(1) moved (2) fluttereth (3) shake
RSV translates---(1) was moving (2) flutters (3) shake
NASB translates---(1) was moving (2) hovers (3) tremble
NIV translates---(1) was hovering (2) hovers (3) tremble
As you examine this comparison one translation stands out for its consistency. It is Young’s translation. To conclude whether this consistency is good or bad you need only to examine Young’s usage of the word (ברך) transliterated barak, in Job 1:5,11; 2:5. Hebrew words have multiple meanings when translated into English. In the case of barak it means both to bless and curse as exhibited in Job 1:5,11; 2:5. Young would not render the word barak curse, thus depleting those three verses in Job of a rendering that makes sense. Satan did not say Job would bless God if he lost his substance and his health.
The direct object changed in each of these three verses. The object of the first verse was Spirit, the object of the second verse was Eagle, and the object of the third verse was bones, thus you have the change of wording.
GENESIS 1:2 depicts a geoidal earth totally covered with water. Two Hebrew words, tehom, normally translated "the deep", and hamayim, "the waters", are both found in verse two. Driver says that tehom as used here does not mean what the deep, or the sea, would denote to the modern world, but rather "the primitive undivided waters; the huge watery mass which the writer conceived as enveloping the earth." These waters pictured in verse 2 completely covered our planet, forming a hydrosphere upon the earth and apparently a hot, steamy atmosphere for some miles above the earth - an utterly uninhabitable chaos. Such is the condition of the earth as the Spirit of God initiates His first creative act on Day One.
Following the creation of light, God deals with teom, the "bathic deep". Two acts are necessary for this: the separation of the waters above the earth from the waters below, and the raising of the land and the forcing of the oceans into their allotted areas. In verse 7,
"God made the sky[firmament]
"and He used the sky to
"separate[i.e. establish order between]
the waters under the sky from the waters above the sky."The words of verse 7 thus describe the establishment of the antediluvian vapour canopy. Without a perception of this canopy, Bible students are mystified about the significance of the second day's work.
"The waters above" were called mabbul, a specific Hebrew designation to distinguish the canopy from the waters below, teom, "the oceans". Although mabbul is not specifically used in chapter one, it does appear subsequently, particularly in the Flood narrative, as later biblical authors correctly recall the canopy's former existence. Von Rad exegetes the scripture brilliantly:
"An understanding... of the Flood depends materially on the correct translation of the word mabbul. Mabbul does not mean "flood", "inundation", or even "destruction", but it is a technical term for a part of the world structure, namely, the heavenly ocean. This heavenly sea, which is above the firmament (raqia), empties downward... We must understand the Flood, therefore, as a catastrophe involving the entire cosmos. When the heavenly ocean breaks forth upon the earth below, and the primeval sea beneath the earth, which is restrained by God, now freed from its bonds, gushes up through yawning chasms onto the earth, then there is a destruction of the entire cosmic system according to biblical cosmogony. The two halves of the chaotic primeval sea, separated - the one up, the other below - by God's creative government, are again united; creation begins to sink again into chaos. Here the catastrophe, therefore, concerns not only men and beasts... but the earth - indeed, the entire cosmos."
Mabbul then is the specific term for "the waters above", and our English versions should use the words "the canopy" or an appropriate synonym each time mabbul appears. Brown, Driver & Briggs, in their classic Hebrew lexicon, state that mabbul "seems... to be almost a proper name..." Indeed, twice it appears without the definite article, suggesting its use as a proper name. The word is found 13 times in the Old Testament, and it is commonly mistranslated, as Von Rad notes.
1.2c And [above all of this] the wind-breath of the Elohim fluttered [like an eagle] over the surface of the [two] waters.
1.3 And God said, Let there be light: and there was light.
Vayomer Elohim yehi-or vayehi-or.
Similar ancient Babylonian, Egyptian, and Indian cosmogonies also imply a divine power inherent in the word itself which when uttered brings out order. Numerous ancient myths provide a good example of the likeness of the creative power of the divine word. In ancient Egypt the god Ptah of Memphis, in a comparable fashion, created the world through his spoken word. While Sumerian myths describe how divinities first plan their creation by thinking, and then the world comes into being through the power of speech.
The narrative does not explain to whom God speaks, nor from where. God here is an individuum vaguum; i.e., a vague and image-less individual. He nevertheless uses speech, which is a human characteristic. He does so without using the configuration of an individuum certum, in other words, without assuming the identity -or the image- of a person. Consequently, the creative powers of the word supersedes any other human attribute.
Moreover, the biblical Hebrew alphabet is made up primarily of 22 consonants. In the un-vocalized Hebrew alphabet, speech is necessary to give meaning to the un-vocalized words, otherwise the letters are a meaningless and chaotic code. Only with the spoken word are the vowels uttered. By exhaling one’s breath into the letters, the alphabet miraculously takes on a life and Spirit of its own, and words finally become meaningful.
As the text shows, God speaks from nowhere and to nobody in particular. Yet he becomes preoccupied with the order and plan of things to which he is about to give names. He also becomes involved in the separation of the world into a set order of categories; most obvious of which is the division of time into seven days and the classification of his creation by name.
http://netage.org/2010/03/01/creation-and-goddess-symbols-in-genesis-1-3/
Structure of the "day passages"
God's work of creation occurred in various periods which are presented to have taken place chronologically in the order reported in Genesis one. Each of the six segments of the record begins with God's decree relating to a specific aspect of his plan to create all the heavens and the earth. And each segment climaxes with God's observation and announcement that a particular stage in the realizing of his intended creation had been essentially completed. This final approval would necessarily have taken place on one particular 24-hour day.
God's work of creation occurred in various periods which are presented to have taken place chronologically in the order reported in Genesis one. Each of the six segments of the record begins with God's decree relating to a specific aspect of his plan to create all the heavens and the earth. And each segment climaxes with God's observation and announcement that a particular stage in the realizing of his intended creation had been essentially completed. This final approval would necessarily have taken place on one particular 24-hour day.
Notice there are six general elements associated with the first creative period as presented in Genesis 1:3-5. They fall into three more basic categories: the decree of what is to be created, the acts of God in realizing his decree, and the final approbation that what he had decreed had come into physical existence.
First: declaration
God had eternally decreed all things that he would bring into being by the work of special creation. Each of the six periods of creation in Genesis one begins with the particular desire of God toward one part of that over-all decree being spoken, It shows the implementation of that intention as his plan was supernaturally brought into being in the realm of a physical universe. The first of these words is recorded in Genesis 1:3a when God said, let there be light . In Hebrew, his word is a very brief statement using just two words, (yehi 'or) which most simply stated means be light.
God had eternally decreed all things that he would bring into being by the work of special creation. Each of the six periods of creation in Genesis one begins with the particular desire of God toward one part of that over-all decree being spoken, It shows the implementation of that intention as his plan was supernaturally brought into being in the realm of a physical universe. The first of these words is recorded in Genesis 1:3a when God said, let there be light . In Hebrew, his word is a very brief statement using just two words, (yehi 'or) which most simply stated means be light.
Second: creation
The act of actual creation then took place by which what God had spoken was brought into being. Genesis 1:3b uses the exact same Hebrew expression used in the decree showing its enactment. It says, and there was light. Combining the Hebrew with our translation it says, God said, (yehi 'or) and (yehi 'or). Literally we might translate the second use of the phrase as, and there be light. It's a bit awkward in English. We could have translated it, "God said be light, and there be light."
The act of actual creation then took place by which what God had spoken was brought into being. Genesis 1:3b uses the exact same Hebrew expression used in the decree showing its enactment. It says, and there was light. Combining the Hebrew with our translation it says, God said, (yehi 'or) and (yehi 'or). Literally we might translate the second use of the phrase as, and there be light. It's a bit awkward in English. We could have translated it, "God said be light, and there be light."
1.3 And [then] the Elohim expressed these words: "Let light exist" and light [now] exists.
1:4. And God saw the light, that it was good: and God divided the light from the darkness.
Vayar Elohim et-ha'or ki-tov vayavdel Elohim beyn ha'or uveyn hachoshech.
