R
Richca
Guest
(continued)
Also, the NABRE translation and interpretation of Gen. 1: 1-3 within the context of the rest of the creation narrative of Genesis 1-2:3 can hardly be said I believe to make any sense. For example, v.2 says ‘and darkness was upon/over the face of the deep.’ Where is this ‘darkness over the face of the deep’ if not in the heavens of verse 1? Verse 3 continues and says:
‘And God said, “Let there be light”; and there was light. And God saw that the light was good; and God separated the light from the darkness. God called the light Day, and the darkness he called Night. And there was evening and there was morning, one day.’
How can you have light/darkness, day/night, ‘one day’ without the heavens? If we follow the NAB/NABRE interpretation, the heavens aren’t made until day 2 in the making of the firmament separating the waters from the waters in which case it follows that we now have the light/darkness. day/night, a second day, above the visible heavens, the firmament, in an apparently another heaven of sorts uncreated by God. I don’t see how this is going to make any sense to the simple Israelite folk who were the immediate audience of Moses’ creation narrative of Genesis 1-2:3 or even to Moses, the traditional believed author of Genesis of whom it is written ‘The LORD would speak to Moses face to face, as one speaks to a friend’ (Exodus 33:11) or to an inspired sacred redactor of Genesis 1, a master theologian.
Accordingly, the traditional rendering of Gen. 1:1 ‘In the beginning God created the heavens and the earth’, God’s first creative act, makes much more sense with what follows not only with verse 2 which is a description of the state of the heavens and the earth after this first creative act, namely, the ‘the earth was without form and void’ and ‘darkness was upon/over the face of the deep,’ that is, there was only darkness in the heavens over the waters which covered the earth. Subsequently, God’s next creative act pertains to giving further formation to the heavens, namely, the creation of light and in which He divides the light from the darkness and ‘God called the light Day, and the darkness he called Night. And there was evening and there was morning, one day’(verse 5).
The ‘one day’ of v. 5 is also mistranslated by the NAB/NABRE and the NRSV as ‘the first day.’ The hebrew text has neither the definite article ‘the’ or the ordinal number ‘first’ but simply the cardinal number ‘one’ with ‘yom’ day. Neither in the hebrew text of the Old Testament from days 2-5 is there the definite article ‘the’ as found in the NAB/NABRE and NRSV, but the indefinite article ‘a,’ i.e., ‘a second day,’ a third day,’ and so on. Only the sixth and seventh days in the hebrew text have the definite article ‘the’. The syntax used by the sacred writer concerning the ‘days’ of Genesis is all significant and many commentaries/interpretations of this use by the inspired sacred writer have been written concerning just this.
Also, the NABRE translation and interpretation of Gen. 1: 1-3 within the context of the rest of the creation narrative of Genesis 1-2:3 can hardly be said I believe to make any sense. For example, v.2 says ‘and darkness was upon/over the face of the deep.’ Where is this ‘darkness over the face of the deep’ if not in the heavens of verse 1? Verse 3 continues and says:
‘And God said, “Let there be light”; and there was light. And God saw that the light was good; and God separated the light from the darkness. God called the light Day, and the darkness he called Night. And there was evening and there was morning, one day.’
How can you have light/darkness, day/night, ‘one day’ without the heavens? If we follow the NAB/NABRE interpretation, the heavens aren’t made until day 2 in the making of the firmament separating the waters from the waters in which case it follows that we now have the light/darkness. day/night, a second day, above the visible heavens, the firmament, in an apparently another heaven of sorts uncreated by God. I don’t see how this is going to make any sense to the simple Israelite folk who were the immediate audience of Moses’ creation narrative of Genesis 1-2:3 or even to Moses, the traditional believed author of Genesis of whom it is written ‘The LORD would speak to Moses face to face, as one speaks to a friend’ (Exodus 33:11) or to an inspired sacred redactor of Genesis 1, a master theologian.
Accordingly, the traditional rendering of Gen. 1:1 ‘In the beginning God created the heavens and the earth’, God’s first creative act, makes much more sense with what follows not only with verse 2 which is a description of the state of the heavens and the earth after this first creative act, namely, the ‘the earth was without form and void’ and ‘darkness was upon/over the face of the deep,’ that is, there was only darkness in the heavens over the waters which covered the earth. Subsequently, God’s next creative act pertains to giving further formation to the heavens, namely, the creation of light and in which He divides the light from the darkness and ‘God called the light Day, and the darkness he called Night. And there was evening and there was morning, one day’(verse 5).
The ‘one day’ of v. 5 is also mistranslated by the NAB/NABRE and the NRSV as ‘the first day.’ The hebrew text has neither the definite article ‘the’ or the ordinal number ‘first’ but simply the cardinal number ‘one’ with ‘yom’ day. Neither in the hebrew text of the Old Testament from days 2-5 is there the definite article ‘the’ as found in the NAB/NABRE and NRSV, but the indefinite article ‘a,’ i.e., ‘a second day,’ a third day,’ and so on. Only the sixth and seventh days in the hebrew text have the definite article ‘the’. The syntax used by the sacred writer concerning the ‘days’ of Genesis is all significant and many commentaries/interpretations of this use by the inspired sacred writer have been written concerning just this.
Last edited:
