In his book Genesis 1-11 Westermann comes up with a fine association which helps with an interpretation of Genesis 1, in particular Gen 1:1-3. He does a comparative study of ancient creation myths and what scholars have to say about the creation myths and there seems to be a common introduction formula used in most of these. The formula is summed up as
'When this and that was not yet'This formula is used to frame the creation myths. I do not believe Genesis 1, 2, 3 are myths, myths defined as made up or fictional events. I believe Genesis relates true consummated events between real objects. Genesis 1, 2, & 3 uses some figurative concepts but the reason is that God and the sacred author explain past objects in existence and their relations that are not apparent. No one was there to see what happened other than God and the Angels. In addition the prophetic author had a smaller pool of concepts to use in his description. He is writing thousands of years ago before all our modern developments. Thus they (God and the sacred author working together) reasonably choose some figurative concepts so that the reader can visualize what is happening.
But even though I do not think that Genesis 1 is a myth, it seems reasonable to me that the sacred author would use an opening formula similar in style to other stories of his time. The sacred author was embedded in an ancient Eastern culture. So if this is how people opened stories in his time then so be it. One need not abandon Faith, only assume this study to Faith and further apply some critical thinking skills. So in my view it can only help to know how people may have related their stories way back in the ancient days.
God, Heaven and Earth in Genesis 1:1
My translation of Gen 1:1-3 is
The opening phrase is a concept associating the memory of God creating the Heaven and the Earth . The Heaven is an object that exists not a concept (a relation of two or more objects). The Heaven of the first verse is the detached sphere God created and placed Himself in. It is the place where God lives. It is discrete, detached from matter, i.e. the network of atoms. It makes perfect sense that the sacred author would open with this object since God created this object first and this is from where God will act to transform another object called the Earth. In telling a story it makes sense to state all the relevant mediators involved in the events. God acts from His sphere called Heaven.
Prior to the the main event of Genesis One, God was not yet on the Earth. Earth was just another old dark star assuming a succession of locations in relation to all other stars of the Milky Way. Yes God had created it long ago, and perhaps Earth was predestined. God always knew what he would accomplish with the Earth, but even before God moved to enact the miraculous light event, Earth was not special. There are countless objects out there that God could have just as easily have chosen for his purposes. But he freely chose to send the Spirit to this astronomical object called Earth. It is when the Spirit was sent to the Earth, hovering over the surface of the Earth so as to be the Divine mediator of the miraculous light event that all of a sudden this object becomes special, elect, and so on.
In a beginning God had created the form of Heaven and the form of Earth
And when the Earth was an astonishing-desert with darkness over the face of the abyss
And the Spirit of God oscillating over the face of the waters: God said, "Let light happen!" And light happened.
The opening phrase is a concept associating the memory of God creating the Heaven and the Earth . The Heaven is an object that exists not a concept (a relation of two or more objects). The Heaven of the first verse is the detached sphere God created and placed Himself in. It is the place where God lives. It is discrete, detached from matter, i.e. the network of atoms. It makes perfect sense that the sacred author would open with this object since God created this object first and this is from where God will act to transform another object called the Earth. In telling a story it makes sense to state all the relevant mediators involved in the events. God acts from His sphere called Heaven.
Prior to the the main event of Genesis One, God was not yet on the Earth. Earth was just another old dark star assuming a succession of locations in relation to all other stars of the Milky Way. Yes God had created it long ago, and perhaps Earth was predestined. God always knew what he would accomplish with the Earth, but even before God moved to enact the miraculous light event, Earth was not special. There are countless objects out there that God could have just as easily have chosen for his purposes. But he freely chose to send the Spirit to this astronomical object called Earth. It is when the Spirit was sent to the Earth, hovering over the surface of the Earth so as to be the Divine mediator of the miraculous light event that all of a sudden this object becomes special, elect, and so on.
The Earth of Gen 1:1 is also an object that existed and still exists. It resolves to an astronomical object, not a concept. God creates nouns of reality not concepts. God uses concepts He conceived to work his miracles, but these resolve to real objects in relation with each other. The Heaven and the Earth are two real objects.
The word 'beginning' resolves to a concept. Time is not a noun of reality. There is no such thing as time. Time is not an object, and it certainly does not exist. Time is a brain-work. The brain works to compare two or more motions where at least one is an assumed constant, e.g. rotation of the Earth and orbit of Earth in relation to Sun. The conceptual beginning which the sacred author proposes is indefinite for several reasons one of which he decided to omit a definite article, "the". To omit a definite article is to propose indefiniteness. A higher conceptual translation is "In a beginning", not "In the beginning". The definite article was later added to translations because of the misconception that the sacred author is describing matter's creation ex nihilo.
Instead the sacred author describes an indefinite memory and motion of three objects namely God and the Heaven and the Earth. In other words he knew that these two objects were created by God and existed, but he did not know when in relation to the main light event. He is simply states that these objects had been created by God and had existed for an indefinite time, one that he had no other motion to compare to.
More importantly the prophet is stating that these are two objects of his story. As a result of the events of Genesis One a Divine connection is established between the Heaven and the Earth. Heaven is not woven into the web of atoms, but the Earth is. God sends forth the Spirit to the Earth thus making a connection. This is elementary. Anyone who reads a merism into this verse is missing the point. It is implied in all of the Genesis One events that God is acting from the sphere He created and placed Himself in. Later on the second Divine day, God calls the Earthen-sphere Heaven as a figurative concept, identifying our Earthen sphere and associating it with His sphere. One of the reasons He does this is for teaching purposes. These are some reasons why the Heaven of God gets related at the outset.
Heaven and Earth a Merism for the Universe???
Why read universe into 'the Heaven and the Earth'? There is no point. Yes God created all objects out of nothing. Every believer knows this. But Gen 1:1 only states two objects: the Heaven and the Earth. Two objects does not equal all objects unless you make the Heaven into a plural and stretch the meaning, something which is inconsistent with the rest of a narrative that rests on unity, integrity and organization.
The word 'beginning' resolves to a concept. Time is not a noun of reality. There is no such thing as time. Time is not an object, and it certainly does not exist. Time is a brain-work. The brain works to compare two or more motions where at least one is an assumed constant, e.g. rotation of the Earth and orbit of Earth in relation to Sun. The conceptual beginning which the sacred author proposes is indefinite for several reasons one of which he decided to omit a definite article, "the". To omit a definite article is to propose indefiniteness. A higher conceptual translation is "In a beginning", not "In the beginning". The definite article was later added to translations because of the misconception that the sacred author is describing matter's creation ex nihilo.
Instead the sacred author describes an indefinite memory and motion of three objects namely God and the Heaven and the Earth. In other words he knew that these two objects were created by God and existed, but he did not know when in relation to the main light event. He is simply states that these objects had been created by God and had existed for an indefinite time, one that he had no other motion to compare to.
More importantly the prophet is stating that these are two objects of his story. As a result of the events of Genesis One a Divine connection is established between the Heaven and the Earth. Heaven is not woven into the web of atoms, but the Earth is. God sends forth the Spirit to the Earth thus making a connection. This is elementary. Anyone who reads a merism into this verse is missing the point. It is implied in all of the Genesis One events that God is acting from the sphere He created and placed Himself in. Later on the second Divine day, God calls the Earthen-sphere Heaven as a figurative concept, identifying our Earthen sphere and associating it with His sphere. One of the reasons He does this is for teaching purposes. These are some reasons why the Heaven of God gets related at the outset.
Heaven and Earth a Merism for the Universe???
Why read universe into 'the Heaven and the Earth'? There is no point. Yes God created all objects out of nothing. Every believer knows this. But Gen 1:1 only states two objects: the Heaven and the Earth. Two objects does not equal all objects unless you make the Heaven into a plural and stretch the meaning, something which is inconsistent with the rest of a narrative that rests on unity, integrity and organization.
The second verse is the proposal of 'when this and not yet that'. We have the Earth, an astronomical object that exists but this Earth is not yet transfigured by a miraculous light event described in the third verse. This is an Earth that is radically different from the one we know today. Barren, no living objects, no clear landmasses and oceans. So a basic description is given as to the state of the Earth just prior to when it was transfigured by God.
My understanding is that Genesis 1 has nothing to do with the angel's and matter's simultaneous creation ex nihilo. Assuming Faith, there is no reason that God and the sacred author would crunch in countless years between verses 1 to 5. Creation ex nihilo happened before the main event of Genesis One and the sacred author decided not to explain these. Why? Because he was not given a prophetic communication of the angel's and matter's creation ex nihilo. God only took him to this and not yet that. He had a mission to write that which was shown him from the past and not all history. His flash point was a phase of the Earth just prior to surface having been transfigured by God. The Earth was a wandering planet not even in a gravitational lock with our Sun.
Now, all the educated Gen 1 students know that the creation ex nihilo teaching did not develop for hundreds of years after Gen 1 was written. No problem at all. Creation ex nihilo can be drawn from hundreds of other verses in the Bible. The only problem is coming up with a fresh solution to the Gen 1 Text. We actually have to think now outside of the old stodgy rules for a change.
Genesis One is a story of election and critical events that define our existence. Just because theologians cannot figure out at what phase of the Earth that the main event initiated, does not mean we have to go adopting a mythical eternal matter, a primeval atom or undefined chaos with germs of intrinsic annihilation (Ala ancient myths, Edgar Allan Poe, Big-Bang and Big-Crunch). Nor do we have to go reading in a tract on philosophy, e.g. materia informis and the concept time. One is free to do philosophy to solve the problem of universal history but this is not the place. The Gen 1 author could have cared less about philosophy. He wrote as a prophet. Prophets speak forthright. They do not fop around with philosophy. Too much is at stake. Were Jesus and Moses and Elias philosophers or were they prophets?
My understanding is that Genesis 1 has nothing to do with the angel's and matter's simultaneous creation ex nihilo. Assuming Faith, there is no reason that God and the sacred author would crunch in countless years between verses 1 to 5. Creation ex nihilo happened before the main event of Genesis One and the sacred author decided not to explain these. Why? Because he was not given a prophetic communication of the angel's and matter's creation ex nihilo. God only took him to this and not yet that. He had a mission to write that which was shown him from the past and not all history. His flash point was a phase of the Earth just prior to surface having been transfigured by God. The Earth was a wandering planet not even in a gravitational lock with our Sun.
Now, all the educated Gen 1 students know that the creation ex nihilo teaching did not develop for hundreds of years after Gen 1 was written. No problem at all. Creation ex nihilo can be drawn from hundreds of other verses in the Bible. The only problem is coming up with a fresh solution to the Gen 1 Text. We actually have to think now outside of the old stodgy rules for a change.
Genesis One is a story of election and critical events that define our existence. Just because theologians cannot figure out at what phase of the Earth that the main event initiated, does not mean we have to go adopting a mythical eternal matter, a primeval atom or undefined chaos with germs of intrinsic annihilation (Ala ancient myths, Edgar Allan Poe, Big-Bang and Big-Crunch). Nor do we have to go reading in a tract on philosophy, e.g. materia informis and the concept time. One is free to do philosophy to solve the problem of universal history but this is not the place. The Gen 1 author could have cared less about philosophy. He wrote as a prophet. Prophets speak forthright. They do not fop around with philosophy. Too much is at stake. Were Jesus and Moses and Elias philosophers or were they prophets?
The Earth of the first and second verses resolves to an object not a figurative concept. Concepts are relations of two or more objects. Concepts do not have surface features (e.g. face of the waters) as do physical objects in existence whether that be five billion years ago or today. Example: your wife's face has little pools of tears over her eyes. This is a facial feature similar to the Earth having a face of waters.
The relation of Gen 1 verses 1, 2, & 3 suggests an undefined prehistory, one that we know little or nothing about. Prehistory is the angel's and matter's history. On the other hand our history begins with the main event, namely: And let light happen.
Clause Westermann's Thought
Clause Westermann's Thought
Westermann has some interesting thought concerning a formula that suggests the opening language structure of the prophetic Genesis One story. I think these are useful.
From Westermann's Genesis 1-11 pages 42-46:
From Westermann's Genesis 1-11 pages 42-46:
A formula which is so widespread and of such a long standing must say something very important about the idea of creation. The action of creation is understood as a transformation, as a changing of chaos or nothingness, however these are understood, into the world as it now is, that is, into the world which is destined for people to live in. This way of speaking about transformation prevents the world and its existence from being taken for granted; the world in its contingency is traced back to an event which transcends it, namely the act by which the creator brought about change. This way of speaking is of great significance because it is the place where talk about creation becomes a narrative in the strict sense. It brings a flash point into the creation event. It is here that the question of creation ex nihilo must be introduced. Can the phrase “when this and that was not yet” be replaced simply by “when as yet there was nothing” without altering the purpose of the narrative which is to describe creation as a change? . . .These threads of thought fit in very well with my understanding of the light event. God acts to transfigure a preexisting astronomical object and this transcendent event marks the beginning of our history. Our unique beginning is 'and light happened'. Light references a phenomenon, a dynamic relation of objects. God initiated a unique and miraculous relation with a preexisting astronomical object labelled by the sacred author as the Earth.
God did this via the Spirit. In my view, the Earth was an old star prior to the main event which is basically the same as a planet. This star existed for billions of years and naturally transitioned to the phase which is summarized by the sacred author in the second verse. When the Earth was a cinder of what was once a star, God sent forth the Spirit and changed it. God renewed the face of this old star and this is the beginning of Man, and not only man but also the first pristine plants, microorganisms, animals, landmasses, and oceans before the Fall. Westermann continues:
The texts Grapow has collected show the significance of this formula and demonstrate at the same time the different ways in which it can be used. Its basic function is always the same; to fix a point in the course of events when time and existence as experienced in the everyday world are marked off from a primeval state when all that conditions present existence had not yet come to be. One could describe the formula as the narrative trait that marks off primeval time.So the formula that the sacred author uses is consistent with other creation stories. It marks off a transition from a prehistory which we know little about. Who presumes to know the entire history of the network of atoms, i.e. matter? Who presumes to know the entire history of the angels? No one in their right mind. Plus for what critical purpose would the info on the history of angels and matter serve us? Why would God even bother revealing this type of information? Westermann continues:
The reason for this is that the formula “when there was not yet” is the narrative characteristic that marks off primeval time. Narrative must speak of something; it cannot tell of nothing.
This calls to mind Gen 1:2, for the explanation of which we have now an important insight. The survey shows that it is Gen 1:2 and not Gen 1:1 that corresponds to the formula. Consequently the argument for translating Gen 1:1 as a subordinate clause corresponding to the formula disappears. On the other hand Gen 1:2 corresponds exactly, the only adaptation being that the negative expression is changed into a positive one as with the example cited from Egyptian texts. Gen 1:2 must be explained from the history of the tradition of this motif. This means that its intent is not to describe a state that preceded creation, but to mark off God’s act of creation from a “before” which is beyond words and can only be described in negative terms.
The primary purpose of all these sentences is to delimit and not to describe,
The formula “when there was not yet” [in other words creation ex nihilo] makes it possible for the old creation narratives to describe creation as an event or as an act. Acts and events occur only in a series in any given narrative, linked in some way to what has gone before. Creation is narrated as the primal beginning which took place “when this and that was not yet there.” The purpose of the formula is to give creation the character of an event.
Gen 1 has no option but to speak in concrete terms which mark off creation as an event from any “before” which can only be described negatively. If Gen 1:1-2 intended to describe creation ex nihilo, then that would be something that simply cannot be reported. One can teach creation ex nihilo; but one cannot narrate it.
Gen 1:1-2 does not describe creation ex nihilo. But the existence of atoms, stars, and the fundamental objects that mediate light and gravity, not to mention the Angels, prior to the main event of Genesis One was not really chaos or negative it is only dark to the sacred author's mind, so to speak. He did not know much of anything about it other than God created these two objects called Heaven and Earth.
Gen 1:2 describes an astronomical object, one which has form. The Earth is described as an astonishing-desert with facial features that is an abyss/the waters. This object is about to be transfigured by God via the missive Spirit. Gen 1:2 describes an astronomical object which is about to enter in a singular relation with God that no other astronomical object in the universe can boast of. The Earth was an old transitioned star and at some flash point God changed it forever. God initiated a unique and dynamic relationship with this dying star that will continue forever. The future fire event predicted by Saint Peter will be the final renewal begun by the light event of Genesis One.
Final Thoughts
Final Thoughts
The main event of Genesis One is the transfiguration [i.e. change of the surface] of the Earth to a renewed astronomical object fit for Man. Soon later Adam and Eve sinned in Paradise and perhaps were detained there asleep so that the Earth could cycle through a fallen course of Nature for millions or a few billions of years. So much so that the new Earth Adam first saw when he was created, and the old cursed Earth Adam and Eve were banished to from Paradise were very much different in spite of some similarities.
No comments:
Post a Comment