Precepts study of Genesis 1

[Inan3]

Looks like you may have to take the lead on this. I would be interested in what they are teaching on some of these words:

without form and void

the deep

face of the waters

To find the meaning of "without form" and "void" (tohu and bohu) it seems important to find the meaning of the verb before them, that being "was".

The strongs definition of this word follows:

H1961
היה
hâyâh
haw-yaw'
A primitive root (compare H1933); to exist, that is, be or become, come to pass (always emphatic, and not a mere copula or auxiliary): - beacon, X altogether, be (-come, accomplished, committed, like), break, cause, come (to pass), continue, do, faint, fall, + follow, happen, X have, last, pertain, quit (one-) self, require, X use.

(That it is always emphatic means that it used to emphasize something.)

The earth "existed" without form and void.

The earth "became" without form and void.

The earth "came to pass" without form and void.

This could tell us that the earth's condition was changed somehow in it's state of being without form and void.

היה hāyah, "be." It is to be noted, however, that the word has three meanings, two of which now scarcely belong to our English "be."

1. "Be, as an event, start into being, begin to be, come to pass." This may be understood of a thing beginning to be, אור יהי yehiy 'ôr, "be light" Gen_1:3; or of an event taking place, ימים מקץ ויהי vayehîy mîqēts yāmîym, "and it came to pass from the end of days."

2. "Be," as a change of state, "become." This is applied to what had a previous existence, but undergoes some change in its properties or relations; as מלח גציב ותהי vatehîy netsîyb melach, "and she became" a pillar of salt Gen_19:26.

3. "Be," as a state. This is the ultimate meaning to which the verb tends in all languages. In all its meanings, especially in the first and second, the Hebrew speaker presumes an onlooker, to whom the object in question appears coming into being, becoming or being, as the case may be. Hence, it means to be manifestly, so that eye-witnesses may observe the signs of existence.




The word "without form" is

H8414
תּהוּ
tôhû
to'-hoo
From an unused root meaning to lie waste; a desolation (of surface), that is, desert; figuratively a worthless thing; adverbially in vain: - confusion, empty place, without form, nothing, (thing of) nought, vain, vanity, waste, wilderness.




The word "void" is

H922
בּהוּ
bôhû
bo'-hoo
From an unused root (meaning to be empty); a vacuity, that is, (superficially) an undistinguishable ruin: - emptiness, void.


Will add to this at another time when it is not so late.

 

[busterdog]

Harlotry is legal in the sate of Nevada and except maybe when the harlot crosses state lines or is underage, harlotry is not against federal law. It is a state matter.

By the way if your king is Adolf Hitler, does the Bible say you have to obey him?

Outside of Nevada, how should we respond to harlotry, or adultery?

By legally protecting those who commit murder, my government sanctions more murders than Hitler ever committed. As an annual rate, the US also seems to pretty well keep pace with holocaust.

UNITED STATES

Number of abortions per year: 1.37 Million (1996)
Number of abortions per day: Approximately 3,700

I pretty much obey the law, nonetheless.

In the early Church, the Christians refused to stop worshipping Jesus despite being outlawed. But they did not stone the idolaters who were in power.

Neither Joseph, nor Daniel nor Moses were revolutionaries while serving idolatrous tyrants.

 

[busterdog]

To find the meaning of "without form" and "void" (tohu and bohu) it seems important to find the meaning of the verb before them, that being "was".

The strongs definition of this word follows:

H1961
???
hâyâh
haw-yaw'
A primitive root (compare H1933); to exist, that is, be or become, come to pass (always emphatic, and not a mere copula or auxiliary): - beacon, X altogether, be (-come, accomplished, committed, like), break, cause, come (to pass), continue, do, faint, fall, + follow, happen, X have, last, pertain, quit (one-) self, require, X use.

(That it is always emphatic means that it used to emphasize something.)

The earth "existed" without form and void.

The earth "became" without form and void.

The earth "came to pass" without form and void.

This could tell us that the earth's condition was changed somehow in it's state of being without form and void.

??? h?yah, "be." It is to be noted, however, that the word has three meanings, two of which now scarcely belong to our English "be."

1. "Be, as an event, start into being, begin to be, come to pass." This may be understood of a thing beginning to be, ??? ??? yehiy 'ôr, "be light" Gen_1:3; or of an event taking place, ???? ??? ???? vayehîy mîq?ts y?mîym, "and it came to pass from the end of days."

2. "Be," as a change of state, "become." This is applied to what had a previous existence, but undergoes some change in its properties or relations; as ??? ???? ???? vatehîy netsîyb melach, "and she became" a pillar of salt Gen_19:26.

3. "Be," as a state. This is the ultimate meaning to which the verb tends in all languages. In all its meanings, especially in the first and second, the Hebrew speaker presumes an onlooker, to whom the object in question appears coming into being, becoming or being, as the case may be. Hence, it means to be manifestly, so that eye-witnesses may observe the signs of existence.




The word "without form" is

H8414
?????
tôhû
to'-hoo
From an unused root meaning to lie waste; a desolation (of surface), that is, desert; figuratively a worthless thing; adverbially in vain: - confusion, empty place, without form, nothing, (thing of) nought, vain, vanity, waste, wilderness.




The word "void" is

H922
?????
bôhû
bo'-hoo
From an unused root (meaning to be empty); a vacuity, that is, (superficially) an undistinguishable ruin: - emptiness, void.


Will add to this at another time when it is not so late.

Here is a question.

Let's look at the word become in English.

The Word says "Adam became a living soul." Unless I were to side with my evolutionist friends, I would say that Adam was not "changed" in any practical sense, though apparently some time intervened between being formed of dust and becoming a living soul. For the most part, his creation was more all of one piece, and certainly all on one day.

I am not much of a Hebrew scholar, but I do note that passage about Adam uses the word "chay" for what is translated as "became a living soul."

And as you said, haw yaw, or hayay in the blueletterbible.com version, is used for "was" or "become".

Other uses of haw yaw are to "be", "am" or "come to be" as in the following:

Gen 1:3 And God 0430 said 0559 , Let there be 01961 light 0216: and there was light 0216.

Gen 15:1 After 0310 these things 01697 the word 01697 of the LORD 03068 came 01961 unto Abram 087 in a vision 04236, saying 0559 , Fear 03372 not, Abram 087: I [am] thy shield 04043, [and] thy exceeding 03966 great 07235 reward 07939.

Exd 3:14 And God 0430 said 0559 unto Moses 04872, I AM 01961 THAT I AM 01961 : and he said 0559 , Thus shalt thou say 0559 unto the children 01121 of Israel 03478, I AM hath sent 07971 me unto you.

Exd 11:6 And there shall be 01961 a great 01419 cry 06818 throughout all the land 0776 of Egypt 04714, such as there was none 03808 like it, nor 03808 shall be like it any more 03254 .

So, with that very limited understanding of Hebrew, and hoping a better Hebrew scholar will answer me, I have a hard time seeing Gen 1:2 being the earth changed from something earth-like into something void-like.

For an unchanging God, our creation must exist somewhere else before creation, if only as an idea, whatever that might represent in the "mind of God", (again whatever that phrase from "Our Town" might be). And then it "becomes" here.

What do you think?

 

[flaja]

To find the meaning of "without form" and "void" (tohu and bohu) it seems important to find the meaning of the verb before them, that being "was".

The strongs definition of this word follows:

H1961
היה
hâyâh
haw-yaw'
A primitive root (compare H1933); to exist, that is, be or become, come to pass (always emphatic, and not a mere copula or auxiliary): - beacon, X altogether, be (-come, accomplished, committed, like), break, cause, come (to pass), continue, do, faint, fall, + follow, happen, X have, last, pertain, quit (one-) self, require, X use.

(That it is always emphatic means that it used to emphasize something.)

The earth "existed" without form and void.

The earth "became" without form and void.

The earth "came to pass" without form and void.

This could tell us that the earth's condition was changed somehow in it's state of being without form and void.

היה hāyah, "be." It is to be noted, however, that the word has three meanings, two of which now scarcely belong to our English "be."

1. "Be, as an event, start into being, begin to be, come to pass." This may be understood of a thing beginning to be, אור יהי yehiy 'ôr, "be light" Gen_1:3; or of an event taking place, ימים מקץ ויהי vayehîy mîqēts yāmîym, "and it came to pass from the end of days."

2. "Be," as a change of state, "become." This is applied to what had a previous existence, but undergoes some change in its properties or relations; as מלח גציב ותהי vatehîy netsîyb melach, "and she became" a pillar of salt Gen_19:26.

3. "Be," as a state. This is the ultimate meaning to which the verb tends in all languages. In all its meanings, especially in the first and second, the Hebrew speaker presumes an onlooker, to whom the object in question appears coming into being, becoming or being, as the case may be. Hence, it means to be manifestly, so that eye-witnesses may observe the signs of existence.




The word "without form" is

H8414
תּהוּ
tôhû
to'-hoo
From an unused root meaning to lie waste; a desolation (of surface), that is, desert; figuratively a worthless thing; adverbially in vain: - confusion, empty place, without form, nothing, (thing of) nought, vain, vanity, waste, wilderness.




The word "void" is

H922
בּהוּ
bôhû
bo'-hoo
From an unused root (meaning to be empty); a vacuity, that is, (superficially) an undistinguishable ruin: - emptiness, void.


Will add to this at another time when it is not so late.

Genesis 1:1 begins the Bible in the past tense. In this regard the verb form "was" is simply describing the world at a time before God had completed his creative acts. It is a state of being verb, not an action verb.

I could say "I was home yesterday", but I would not be saing "I became home yesterday".

 

[Inan3]

Genesis 1:1 begins the Bible in the past tense. In this regard the verb form "was" is simply describing the world at a time before God had completed his creative acts. It is a state of being verb, not an action verb.

I could say "I was home yesterday", but I would not be saing "I became home yesterday".

Verbs in English can either be action verbs or state-of-being verbs (also called linking verbs because they link the subject to a word group which renames it or describes it). “Become” is a state-of-being verb. “To be”, “to seem”, and “to become” (in its main meaning) are always state-of-being (linking) verbs. “To become” can be an action verb when it means, “to suit; to be suitable to” (“her clothes become her”).

Whether it was a state of being verb or an action verb really has no bearing on whether the tense is past or present. You could also, say,

"I was angry yesterday" or "I became angry yesterday"

If you will note I did not give you my definition but the actual Hebrew definition and tense of these words.

I understand the scriptures were speaking of the past. It's the farthest back any scripture goes to the past.... IN THE BEGINNING....You can't get anymore past than that...but it is just as correct in speaking of the past to say,

"In the beginning God created the heavens and the earth and the earth became "formlessness, confusion, unreality, emptiness, nothingness, empty space", (as in the Brown-Driver-Briggs Hebrew Definitions which follows)and "emptiness, void, waste" (BDB also follows)

"Without Form"

H8414תּהוּ tôhû
BDB Definition:

1) formlessness, confusion, unreality, emptiness
1a) formlessness (of primeval earth)
1a1) nothingness, empty space
1b) that which is empty or unreal (of idols) (figuratively)
1c) wasteland, wilderness (of solitary places)
1d) place of chaos
1e) vanity
Part of Speech: noun masculine
A Related Word by BDB/Strong’s Number: from an unused root meaning to lie waste
Same Word by TWOT Number: 2494a

"Void"
H922 בּהוּ
bôhû
BDB Definition:

1) emptiness, void, waste
Part of Speech: noun masculine
A Related Word by BDB/Strong’s Number: from an unused root (meaning to be empty)
Same Word by TWOT Number: 205a

Either way can be spoken in from a past tense.

 

[Inan3]

Here is a question.

Let's look at the word become in English.

The Word says "Adam became a living soul." Unless I were to side with my evolutionist friends, I would say that Adam was not "changed" in any practical sense, though apparently some time intervened between being formed of dust and becoming a living soul. For the most part, his creation was more all of one piece, and certainly all on one day.

I am not much of a Hebrew scholar, but I do note that passage about Adam uses the word "chay" for what is translated as "became a living soul."

And as you said, haw yaw, or hayay in the blueletterbible.com version, is used for "was" or "become".

Other uses of haw yaw are to "be", "am" or "come to be" as in the following:

Gen 1:3 And God 0430 said 0559 , Let there be 01961 light 0216: and there was light 0216.

Gen 15:1 After 0310 these things 01697 the word 01697 of the LORD 03068 came 01961 unto Abram 087 in a vision 04236, saying 0559 , Fear 03372 not, Abram 087: I [am] thy shield 04043, [and] thy exceeding 03966 great 07235 reward 07939.

Exd 3:14 And God 0430 said 0559 unto Moses 04872, I AM 01961 THAT I AM 01961 : and he said 0559 , Thus shalt thou say 0559 unto the children 01121 of Israel 03478, I AM hath sent 07971 me unto you.

Exd 11:6 And there shall be 01961 a great 01419 cry 06818 throughout all the land 0776 of Egypt 04714, such as there was none 03808 like it, nor 03808 shall be like it any more 03254 .

So, with that very limited understanding of Hebrew, and hoping a better Hebrew scholar will answer me, I have a hard time seeing Gen 1:2 being the earth changed from something earth-like into something void-like.

For an unchanging God, our creation must exist somewhere else before creation, if only as an idea, whatever that might represent in the "mind of God", (again whatever that phrase from "Our Town" might be). And then it "becomes" here.

What do you think?

Well, I definitely do not agree with my evolutionist friends but it is surmised that between Gen 1:1 and 1:2 that there could have been a cataclysmic event, such as Satan's descent from his position in Heaven or something else. It is called the "gap" theory. I do not say that I hold to this or that I do not for I have not seen any other scriptural evidence of this. The jury is still out on this for me. I just included it as an option.

 

[busterdog]

Well, I definitely do not agree with my evolutionist friends but it is surmised that between Gen 1:1 and 1:2 that there could have been a cataclysmic event, such as Satan's descent from his position in Heaven or something else. It is called the "gap" theory. I do not say that I hold to this or that I do not for I have not seen any other scriptural evidence of this. The jury is still out on this for me. I just included it as an option.

I think yours is an interesting point. I have had interest in gap theory, I just have never been persuaded.

 

[flaja]

Outside of Nevada, how should we respond to harlotry, or adultery?

By legally protecting those who commit murder, my government sanctions more murders than Hitler ever committed. As an annual rate, the US also seems to pretty well keep pace with holocaust.



I pretty much obey the law, nonetheless.

In the early Church, the Christians refused to stop worshipping Jesus despite being outlawed. But they did not stone the idolaters who were in power.

Neither Joseph, nor Daniel nor Moses were revolutionaries while serving idolatrous tyrants.

As far as I know Christians didn’t experience an Empire-wide ban until the time of Diocletian who was one of the next-to-last emperors before Constantine.

Furthermore, until at least the time of Constantine, Christians had neither the power, nor the authority to stone anyone. The same goes for Moses, Joseph and Daniel while they were serving ungodly kings.

As for abortion, it’s debatable whether abortion is a sign of our turn from God, or if things like rampant harlotry and adultery are forces that God has let loose on America because of abortion.

 

[flaja]

Verbs in English can either be action verbs or state-of-being verbs (also called linking verbs because they link the subject to a word group which renames it or describes it). “Become” is a state-of-being verb. “To be”, “to seem”, and “to become” (in its main meaning) are always state-of-being (linking) verbs. “To become” can be an action verb when it means, “to suit; to be suitable to” (“her clothes become her”).

Whether it was a state of being verb or an action verb really has no bearing on whether the tense is past or present. You could also, say,

Genesis opens in the past tense. It does not say the earth did something or that something happened to the earth. Genesis merely explains the earth’s original condition.

Consider this present tense version of Genesis:

It is the beginning and God creates the heaven and the earth.
Time passes and the earth becomes formless and void. God then moves across the face of the deep and says “Let there be light”.

But, this is not how Genesis reads.

"I was angry yesterday" or "I became angry yesterday"

Which would beg the question, why did you become angry? So I ask, if God created the world and something happened to it, why doesn’t the Bible explain to us what happened?

I understand the scriptures were speaking of the past. It's the farthest back any scripture goes to the past.... IN THE BEGINNING....You can't get anymore past than that...

The Gospel of John goes back even farther: 1:1-2 In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. The same was in the beginning with God.

If you insist on accepting “was” in Genesis as an action verb, rather than a state of being verb, then you would likewise have to say that “In the beginning [Jesus] became the Word, and the Word joined God’s presence, and the Word became God.”

This means that Jesus is not co-eternal or co-equal with God and is thus a created being. This is nothing more than Arianism and it is as heretical as the Gap Theory is.



but it is just as correct in speaking of the past to say,

"In the beginning God created the heavens and the earth and the earth became "formlessness, confusion, unreality, emptiness, nothingness, empty space", (as in the Brown-Driver-Briggs Hebrew Definitions which follows)and "emptiness, void, waste" (BDB also follows)

"Without Form"

H8414תּהוּ tôhû
BDB Definition:

1) formlessness, confusion, unreality, emptiness
1a) formlessness (of primeval earth)
1a1) nothingness, empty space
1b) that which is empty or unreal (of idols) (figuratively)
1c) wasteland, wilderness (of solitary places)
1d) place of chaos
1e) vanity
Part of Speech: noun masculine
A Related Word by BDB/Strong’s Number: from an unused root meaning to lie waste
Same Word by TWOT Number: 2494a

"Void"
H922 בּהוּ
bôhû
BDB Definition:

1) emptiness, void, waste
Part of Speech: noun masculine
A Related Word by BDB/Strong’s Number: from an unused root (meaning to be empty)
Same Word by TWOT Number: 205a

Either way can be spoken in from a past tense.
[/quote]


Genesis opens in the past tense. It does not say the earth did something or that something happened to the earth. Genesis merely explains the earth’s original condition.

Consider this present tense version of Genesis:

It is the beginning and God creates the heaven and the earth.
Time passes and the earth becomes formless and void. God then moves across the face of the deep and says “Let there be light”.

But, this is not how Genesis reads.

 

[flaja]

Well, I definitely do not agree with my evolutionist friends but it is surmised that between Gen 1:1 and 1:2 that there could have been a cataclysmic event, such as Satan's descent from his position in Heaven or something else. It is called the "gap" theory. I do not say that I hold to this or that I do not for I have not seen any other scriptural evidence of this. The jury is still out on this for me. I just included it as an option.

This would still mean that God created Adam after sin and evil had entered His creation and thus has no right to object when man is evil because that is the way God created man.

But note Genesis 1:31 And God saw every thing that he had made, and, behold, it was very good. And the evening and the morning were the sixth day.

If Satan had already rebelled against God and had destroyed the earth in the process, how could God say that His creation is very good?

 

[Inan3]

This would still mean that God created Adam after sin and evil had entered His creation and thus has no right to object when man is evil because that is the way God created man.

Firstly God has every right to do anything and everything He pleases! And yet, EVERYTHING He does is just and good.

Rom 9:19 Thou wilt say then unto me, Why doth He yet find fault? For who hath resisted his will?
Rom 9:20 Nay but, O man, who art thou that repliest against God? Shall the thing formed say to him that formed [it], Why hast thou made me thus?
Rom 9:21 Hath not the potter power over the clay, of the same lump to make one vessel unto honour, and another unto dishonour?

But note Genesis 1:31 And God saw every thing that he had made, and, behold, it was very good. And the evening and the morning were the sixth day.

If Satan had already rebelled against God and had destroyed the earth in the process, how could God say that His creation is very good?

Because God was referring in context to what He had just created within the six days. That is not so hard to see or understand if one has a right attitude.

 

[flaja]

Firstly God has every right to do anything and everything He pleases!

But His nature prevents Him from doing so.

I was heard a story on TV about a Christian who had a conservation with a Moslem. According to the Moslem, his god has a right to do anything he wishes to do to his creation- including killing innocent people.

But the Judeo-Christian God is not like this. He is not arbitrary. He is not unjust. Psalm 19:9 The fear of the LORD is clean, enduring for ever: the judgments of the LORD are true and righteous altogether.

I worship a God that is just. I don’t worship a God that will kill something just for the fun of it.

 

[flaja]

Staff edit

Isn’t giving light and motion to matter the equivalent of giving breath and life to man? God first creates something and then He animates it.

God did create everything from nothing when (Genesis 1:1) in the beginning He created the heaven and the earth. God then had to make everything work. He wasn’t bringing order to chaos. You may say separating light from darkness is bringing order to chaos, but it is not. In the physical universe you cannot have light without having matter that can undergo chemical and/or physical changes to produce the light energy and then having other matter that the energy can propagate through in order to travel from place to place. Light can move through the vacuum of space, but until light reaches matter it cannot be seen. Giving light to matter is not bringing order to chaos; it is following the natural laws that govern the universe. Light energy was inherent in matter so light was created in the beginning. But once light was created, it still remained for God to activate it.

 

[flaja]

Staff Edit

Placing a gap of billions of years between the beginning and the creation of man and then filling in these years with death and destruction doesn’t likely aren’t assumptions that lie beyond the scope of the Biblical account?

At least my no-death before sin assumption can be supported by what the Bible otherwise says about God’s just and benevolent nature. A tyrannical, bloodthirsty god has no authority over me.

 

[flaja]

Staff Edit

Because they were evil.

Genesis 13:13 But the men of Sodom were wicked and sinners before the LORD exceedingly.

Genesis 18:23-32 And Abraham drew near, and said, Wilt thou also destroy the righteous with the wicked? Peradventure there be fifty righteous within the city: wilt thou also destroy and not spare the place for the fifty righteous that are therein? That be far from thee to do after this manner, to slay the righteous with the wicked: and that the righteous should be as the wicked, that be far from thee: Shall not the Judge of all the earth do right? And the LORD said, If I find in Sodom fifty righteous within the city, then I will spare all the place for their sakes. And Abraham answered and said, Behold now, I have taken upon me to speak unto the LORD, which am but dust and ashes: Peradventure there shall lack five of the fifty righteous: wilt thou destroy all the city for lack of five? And he said, If I find there forty and five, I will not destroy it. And he spake unto him yet again, and said, Peradventure there shall be forty found there. And he said, I will not do it for forty's sake. And he said unto him, Oh let not the LORD be angry, and I will speak: Peradventure there shall thirty be found there. And he said, I will not do it, if I find thirty there. And he said, Behold now, I have taken upon me to speak unto the LORD: Peradventure there shall be twenty found there. And he said, I will not destroy it for twenty's sake. And he said, Oh let not the LORD be angry, and I will speak yet but this once: Peradventure ten shall be found there. And he said, I will not destroy it for ten's sake.

I’ve seen it said that when the Israelites conquered the Canaanites that had to destroy the livestock because the Canaanites were so sinful that even their animals had venereal disease.

The extent to which God tried to spare Sodom shows that He doesn’t accept death as anything but a consequence of sin. He would not have created anything just so it could die.

 

[flaja]

Staff Edit

How so? Where does Scripture say that God will kill something just for the fun of it? Where does Scripture say God is unjust?

 

[flaja]

Staff Edit

How so? If I am wrong, tell me which Bible verses say I am wrong.

 

[flaja]

Staff Edit

So you cannot produce any Biblical evidence that I am wrong? I have already given you the verses upon which I base my belief of what God's nature is. It is not my fault that Satan has blinded you to the truth.

 

[Inan3]

[/color]

But His nature prevents Him from doing so.

I was heard a story on TV about a Christian who had a conservation with a Moslem. According to the Moslem, his god has a right to do anything he wishes to do to his creation- including killing innocent people.

But the Judeo-Christian God is not like this. He is not arbitrary. He is not unjust. Psalm 19:9 The fear of the LORD is clean, enduring for ever: the judgments of the LORD are true and righteous altogether.

I worship a God that is just. I don’t worship a God that will kill something just for the fun of it.

I think we're on the same side here. I also, serve a God that is just and righteous altogether.