C
CHRISTINE77
Guest
Well, it is the story of God’s relationship to his chosen people. Why is that so amazing?
- Status
M
Mystophilus
Guest
The idea is in the Bible, repeatedly:
Psa 33:6 By the word of the LORD were the heavens made; and all the host of them by the breath of his mouth.
Heb 11:3 Through faith we understand that the worlds were framed by the word of God, so that things which are seen were not made of things which do appear.
2 Pe 3:5 by the word of God the heavens were of old, and the earth standing out of the water and in the water:
Most importantly, though, “All things were made by him” (Jn 1:3) states it quite bluntly: if every thing was made by God, then there was nothing when God began making, which is creation ex nihilo.
Also, Ge 1:1 is a proem: it introduces what comes after it, but it still states that “God created …] the earth”. Therefore, the formless and void earth which is described in v.2 has already been identified as having been created by God.
G
Godfollower
Guest
Under this extremely bizarre theory, God is younger than evil, and evil preexists the creation of the universe. Does that even sound Christian to you?
This professor’s theory is unsupported by the Bible; his assumption that the earth begins as a mass of preexistent matter on which God then acted is simply wrong. “In the beginning God created heaven, and earth. And the earth was void and empty, and darkness was upon the face of the deep; and the spirit of God moved over the waters.” (Genesis 1:1-2). God created heaven and earth. “Oh, that’s just a lead-in”? Seriously? What else do we get to ignore to make a name for ourselves? Was Exodus just a nice story?
God made Heaven and Earth. The professor’s theory is simply wrong.
5
504Katrin
Guest
Of course it is, and but I also think that there’s much more to said beginning and end than what it might look like.
I don’t doubt that you guys already discovered things like these, but I started studying scripture not too long ago, and I must study scripture on my own and so discover things (if I do) on my own, so I’m amazed when I think that I have discovered something
It’s already passed midnight here, and once again I feel like Eutychus (the guy in my sig) or like David who said: “I think of you through the watches of the night”. Good night everyone, ya’ll be blessed!
H
hazcompat
Guest
C
CHRISTINE77
Guest
sweet dreams!Of course it is, and but I also think that there’s much more to said beginning and end than what it might look like.
I don’t doubt that you guys already discovered things like these, but I started studying scripture not too long ago, and I must study scripture on my own and so discover things (if I do) on my own, so I’m amazed when I think that I have discovered something
It’s already passed midnight here, and once again I feel like Eutychus (the guy in my sig) or like David who said: “I think of you through the watches of the night”. Good night everyone, ya’ll be blessed!
P
Peter_Plato
Guest
It might be asked, “IN THE beginning… of what?” The presumption is that the beginning of the cosmos is presumed. If there existed some kind of dark, formless watery void, then a subsequent forming of the cosmos from that pre-existent material would not have been “the beginning.” The prior time at which the formless void came into existence would have been the beginning. So using the phrase “the beginning” implies that God brought the formless void into being and immediately formed it into the cosmos as part of the same initial creative act.
M
Mystophilus
Guest
Yes, which is why “literalist” interpretations of Genesis make no sense: Ge 1 and Ge 2 cannot both be literally true (unless, like the NIV, you alter the verb tense to make them cohere).
R
Richca
Guest
“I beg you, child, to look at the heavens and the earth and see all that is in them; then you will know that God did not make them out of existing things.” ( 2 Maccabees 7:28).
Your teacher simply doesn’t know what he is talking about. Genesis begins with “In the beginning, when God created the heavens and the earth,” this implies that there was a time when the heavens and the earth were not. They had no being, no existence, they were nothing. Only God is eternal, his being and existence is eternal, he has no beginning or end. Thus, God brought that which was nothing, i.e., the heavens and the earth, into being or existence. This is the same thing as saying that God created the world out of nothing because before the world was created by God the world was nothing.
C
CHRISTINE77
Guest
I think the Professor of this is quite learned, there is no need to insult, he is head of History and Jewish studies at Rutgers University!!
. Genesis clearly states that there was a void, shapeless dark mass when God created Heaven and Earth.
I can’t imagine that anyone would take these two stories of creation literally. They are stories about the nature of God and God’s relationship to mankind.
R
Richca
Guest
Christine77: I advise you to pick up and read The Catechism of the Catholic Church.
L
LilyM
Guest
No - Genesis states that God created the heavens and the earth and that the earth WAS the dark shapeless void. The earth and the void are no more two separate things than you at 5 days old are a separate thing from you now. You surely look and feel different now but by no means are you separate from your five day old self.
M
Mystophilus
Guest
I agree that there is no cause to impugn his ability generally, but that does not make him correct in every particular.
Er, no, it doesn’t. As I mentioned above, “the formless and void earth which is described in v.2 has already been identified [in v.1] as having been created by God.”
I agree completely: they cannot be meant to be taken simply literally, because there are two of them and they contradict one another. The first asserts humanity’s role as the culmination of the Creation process, and the second asserts humanity’s role as its centre.
Nonetheless, the first does assert ex nihilo creation, and was understood to do so by its ancient audience, Jewish and Christian.
5
504Katrin
Guest
Isn’t it amazing that we can discuss two sentences of the bible for so long?
“In the beginning” is how it all starts, and it ends with Israel…
I’m thinking that, maybe the Lord wants all Jews to be in Israel in the end? As a matter of fact, we learned in the other thread forums.catholic-questions.org/showthread.php?t=672141 that when the messiach comes all Jews will be in Israel. Mmhhhhhhh. More food for thought and even more questions. Does anyone know if the Messiach is supposed to stay forever once he’s here? That would back up my argumentation
“In the beginning” is how it all starts, and it ends with Israel…
I’m thinking that, maybe the Lord wants all Jews to be in Israel in the end? As a matter of fact, we learned in the other thread forums.catholic-questions.org/showthread.php?t=672141 that when the messiach comes all Jews will be in Israel. Mmhhhhhhh. More food for thought and even more questions. Does anyone know if the Messiach is supposed to stay forever once he’s here? That would back up my argumentation
D
DCNBILL
Guest
This is the question that should be asked of the professor in question. I for one would love to hear his answeer.
P
patrick457
Guest
No answer, but just an observation.
There are two ways of first words of Genesis in Hebrew. The one traditionally preferred by Christians is more explicit about creation ex nihilo: “In [the] beginning God created the heavens and the earth. And the earth was formless and void…” The other, which is favored more by Jewish exegetes (AFAIK), could be read as supporting creation ex materia and runs something like: “When God began creating the heavens and the earth, and the earth [being] formless and void…God said, ‘Let light be.’” The ambiguity lies in the Hebrew.
There are two ways of first words of Genesis in Hebrew. The one traditionally preferred by Christians is more explicit about creation ex nihilo: “In [the] beginning God created the heavens and the earth. And the earth was formless and void…” The other, which is favored more by Jewish exegetes (AFAIK), could be read as supporting creation ex materia and runs something like: “When God began creating the heavens and the earth, and the earth [being] formless and void…God said, ‘Let light be.’” The ambiguity lies in the Hebrew.
M
Mystophilus
Guest
I do not read Hebrew, but the predominant tendency of Hebrew readers seems to suggest that one reading is more natural than the other. The LXX is Εν αρχηι εποιησεν 'ο Θεος τον ουρανον και την γην, like the English, which shows their reading of their MS at least.
G
Godfollower
Guest
And it came to pass that a certain scientist, a holder of doctorate degrees in physics, chemistry, and biology, finished an experiment and realized that he could create life. And he said, “Lo! I am become equal to God! For, like God, I too can create life!”
Whereupon, suddenly he found himself standing on a strange plain. And he was amazed, for he found God standing before him. And God was smiling; and so he greeted God. And, remembering his manners, he hastened to assure God that he meant no disrespect, as he had simply been exulting at the strength of his achievement. And God, being gracious, spake with him; and he proposed to demonstrate his equality to God by creating new life. And God spake, saying, “Let Us see this achievement of thine.”
And the scientist, eager to show off his work, stooped to the ground and took some clay, preparing to form it into the shape of a human, the better to give it life. And God spake, saying . . . .
“Hold on a second! Use your own dirt.”
If God merely took some pre-existing material and formed it into the Heavens and the Earth, then He didn’t make everything that exists. Yet Scripture teaches us that He did. Ergo, He did not merely form pre-existing material; He created the material out of which He formed the Heavens and the Earth.
Whereupon, suddenly he found himself standing on a strange plain. And he was amazed, for he found God standing before him. And God was smiling; and so he greeted God. And, remembering his manners, he hastened to assure God that he meant no disrespect, as he had simply been exulting at the strength of his achievement. And God, being gracious, spake with him; and he proposed to demonstrate his equality to God by creating new life. And God spake, saying, “Let Us see this achievement of thine.”
And the scientist, eager to show off his work, stooped to the ground and took some clay, preparing to form it into the shape of a human, the better to give it life. And God spake, saying . . . .
“Hold on a second! Use your own dirt.”
If God merely took some pre-existing material and formed it into the Heavens and the Earth, then He didn’t make everything that exists. Yet Scripture teaches us that He did. Ergo, He did not merely form pre-existing material; He created the material out of which He formed the Heavens and the Earth.
D
Dave_Noonan
Guest
I don’t really think there is all that much ambiguity in the Hebrew text unless you read against the pointing. It’s: “When God began creating…” and what follows is the state of things at the point creation began: 1) the earth was [wasteland or something] 2) darkness covered the face of the deep 3) the ruach swept over the face of the waters. Genesis 1:1 is not very good support for creation ex nihilo and arguably is contrary to it.
I think that the midrash (e.g., Bereshit Rabbah) indicates clearly that the Rabbis were well aware that the text is problematic.
C
CHRISTINE77
Guest
Thank you! This is exactly my point. I DO believe God created the world out of nothing, but I do NOT think Genesis says that He did. That was what I was trying to get people to see.
What Genesis DOES say, which is contrary to other cultures at that time period, is that God created a GOOD world and that He is one ONE true God.
- Status