Young earth vs Old earth?

[CoreyD]

Isaiah 40:26 doesn't say anything about ex nihilo creation. It notes that God created heavenly lights, which everyone agrees with. But it doesn't say anything about what kind of creation is being referred to.

I am not sure where you got this "ex nihilo" thing from, since the Bible does not require it, as it has nothing to do with God.
The Bible however, does actually say God created things by his vigor; power; force; substance; energy. Because of his great כֹּחַ and incomparable אוֹן, not a single one [of the heavenly stars] is missing.

Fun fact, the Jewish Publication society or JPS 1985 and 2006 translations also say "When God began to create heaven and the earth".

If we want to talk about people who presumably know how to read Hebrew. The Jewish Publication Society would most likely know a thing or two about the Torah.

Genesis 1:1

When God began to create*When God began to create Others “In the beginning God created.” heaven and...

www.sefaria.org

Jewish Publication Society of America Version - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

Continue to ignore the material if you like.
Ancient Jewish scholars, including rabbis from the Talmudic period, generally interpreted Genesis 1:1 as affirming the concept of creatio ex nihilo—the belief that God created the heavens and the earth from nothing. This view was supported by prominent figures such as Rambam (Maimonides) and Ramban (Nachmanides), who saw the verse as foundational to Jewish theology, emphasizing that before creation, there was nothing except God.

...the majority of ancient rabbis understood the creation account as literal in its core message: that God is the sole creator of the universe, and that creation began with a divine act of will. The idea that the world was created from pre-existing matter was generally rejected, as it was seen as incompatible with strict monotheism, which holds that God alone is eternal and self-sufficient.

Is Elmo saying "Goodbye", or "Be Gone"?
If the former...
If the latter... No, Elmo. I'm not going, but feel free to leave whenever you are ready.

If though, you want a serious debate that actually leads somewhere, stick around, because I am going to lay the evidence on the table, shred by shred... proving young earth creation - that is... 6 24 hour day creation is unscriptural.
In the meantime, please view how truth is obtained.

 

[CoreyD]

בְּרֵאשִׁ֖ית בָּרָ֣א אֱלֹהִ֑ים would be “At the beginning,” “God,” “created.” The following breaks it down better: Three Words From The Creation - Day 1 of 4

Thanks Jerry.
I actually used the term "at the beginning here, and in this post.
However , since beginning does not refer to a starting point of duration, but rather, a period, as is seen in John 1:1 and John 8:44, I can appreciate why the preposition "In" is the most favored.

The word "in" is primarily a preposition used to indicate location or time. As a preposition of place, it describes being within a general area, such as "in the room" or "in the city". As a preposition of time, it is used with longer periods like months, seasons, years, or decades, as in "in August" or "in the future".

The word "at" is also primarily a preposition, used to indicate a specific point in time or place. As a preposition of time, it is used with specific clock times, such as "at 8 p.m." or with mealtimes like "at dinner". As a preposition of place, it refers to a precise location, such as "at the office" or "at the corner".

However, I just to point out something, to make a point.
"When I began to ride my bike...", would be similar to "when God began to create..." Is it not?
"In the beginning when I rode my bike...", would be equivalent to "In the beginning, when God created...". Is that correct?

If I said, "In the beginning, when God created the heavens and earth", how different is that to, "In the beginning God created the heavens and the earth"?

 

[Job 33:6]

I am not sure where you got this "ex nihilo" thing from, since the Bible does not require it, as it has nothing to do with God.
The Bible however, does actually say God created things by his vigor; power; force; substance; energy. Because of his great כֹּחַ and incomparable אוֹן, not a single one [of the heavenly stars] is missing.

Nobody denies that God is the ultimate creator.

Continue to ignore the material if you like.
Ancient Jewish scholars, including rabbis from the Talmudic period, generally interpreted Genesis 1:1 as affirming the concept of creatio ex nihilo—the belief that God created the heavens and the earth from nothing. This view was supported by prominent figures such as Rambam (Maimonides) and Ramban (Nachmanides), who saw the verse as foundational to Jewish theology, emphasizing that before creation, there was nothing except God.

"Generally" and yet, others of this time viewed creation as occurring out of chaos. And more importantly, contemporary works to the Old Testament itself include creation out of chaos and those are the sources of the original context.

And again, I'm not saying that there was something before creation, I'm just saying that the creation and Genesis was out of chaos.

And this is a key distinction. Jews of the talmudic period acknowledged that only God is eternal, but in their own writings, such as what I said it above, bereshith rabah 1:5, The creation in Genesis is out of chaos, it's not out of nothing.

Is Elmo saying "Goodbye", or "Be Gone"?
If the former...
If the latter... No, Elmo. I'm not going, but feel free to leave whenever you are ready.

If though, you want a serious debate that actually leads somewhere, stick around, because I am going to lay the evidence on the table, shred by shred... proving young earth creation - that is... 6 24 hour day creation is unscriptural.
In the meantime, please view how truth is obtained.

I'd be curious, I think that I've already done that, but if you have another approach, I'd be curious to see it.

And I think it's telling that the Jewish publication society translation, the JPS says " When God began to create".

That alone is enough to point out that verse 1 is not in and of itself an event. And thus, young earth creationism really has no basis.

You don't seem to like those other translations. I think they're legitimate. And that's really all you need to point out the issue with YECism.

 

[Job 33:6]

However, I just to point out something, to make a point.
"When I began to ride my bike...", would be similar to "when God began to create..." Is it not?

Yes.

"In the beginning when I rode my bike...", would be equivalent to "In the beginning, when God created...". Is that correct?

Yes.

If I said, "In the beginning, when God created the heavens and earth", how different is that to, "In the beginning God created the heavens and the earth"?

It's different because the "when" or some translations say "of", it's saying that the beginning is defined as "when" God created. Meaning that it is God's action that is beginning. Not the material cosmos.

It would be like saying:

in the beginning when I rode the bike, the bike was rusty.

In the beginning, when God created the Earth, the Earth was formless

The bike didn't necessarily become rusty as a result of me beginning to ride it.

Grammatically, it's unclear how long my bike had been rusty when I began to ride it.

The bike didn't necessarily become Rusty as a result of me beginning to ride it.

Likewise, the Earth didn't necessarily become formless as a result of God beginning to create it.

And one easy way to understand this is to look at Jeremiah 26:1 or Jeremiah 27:1.

Jeremiah 26:1 ESV
[1] In the beginning of the reign of Jehoiakim the son of Josiah, king of Judah, this word came from the Lord:

The beginning is defined by what Jehoiakim does. It is not describing the beginning of what Jehoiakim reigned over. And the hebrew here is similar to Genesis 1.

People Just translate Genesis differently because it would be strange to say in the beginning of God created. So translators use the word "when" instead of "of".

And then some translations, instead of saying in the beginning when God created, they just simply say, when God began to create. Because there is so much confusion on the topic, in English it's easier to understand when it is written this way.

 

[Jerry N.]

Thanks Jerry.
I actually used the term "at the beginning here, and in this post.
However , since beginning does not refer to a starting point of duration, but rather, a period, as is seen in John 1:1 and John 8:44, I can appreciate why the preposition "In" is the most favored.

The word "in" is primarily a preposition used to indicate location or time. As a preposition of place, it describes being within a general area, such as "in the room" or "in the city". As a preposition of time, it is used with longer periods like months, seasons, years, or decades, as in "in August" or "in the future".

The word "at" is also primarily a preposition, used to indicate a specific point in time or place. As a preposition of time, it is used with specific clock times, such as "at 8 p.m." or with mealtimes like "at dinner". As a preposition of place, it refers to a precise location, such as "at the office" or "at the corner".

However, I just to point out something, to make a point.
"When I began to ride my bike...", would be similar to "when God began to create..." Is it not?
"In the beginning when I rode my bike...", would be equivalent to "In the beginning, when God created...". Is that correct?

If I said, "In the beginning, when God created the heavens and earth", how different is that to, "In the beginning God created the heavens and the earth"?

If you add the “when,” it deletes the possibility that verse three is a new step in the process. To use Job’s favorite metaphor, it is the difference between saying that the production of the pizza started with the planting of wheat and tomatoes and the production of milk or the operations in the kitchen. Both are valid, but I don’t think Moses was worried about the difference. The narrative starts with verse three, because that is when Moses starts teaching the relationship between God and man.

 

[Jerry N.]

I finally see the disagreement. According to the registration, my car was manufactured in 1999. It is working fine. Anyway, its age is not based on when the iron was smelted or when the engineers designed it, it is based on when it was complete and ready to use. The earth was complete and ready to use on the sixth day. I don’t know how long Adam and Eve were in the garden, but they got evicted about 6000 years ago. I guess that would make me young earth, even if the previous days were a few million years.

 

[CoreyD]

Nobody denies that God is the ultimate creator.

That was not the point I made.
I'm pointing out that God created out of something - his vigor; power; force; substance; energy.

"Generally" and yet, others of this time viewed creation as occurring out of chaos. And more importantly, contemporary works to the Old Testament itself include creation out of chaos and those are the sources of the original context.

The idea that the world was created from pre-existing matter was generally rejected, as it was seen as incompatible with strict monotheism, which holds that God alone is eternal and self-sufficient.
Self efficient, is the key word here, as described by Isaiah at Isaiah 40:26

For example,

• God created water, Nowhere in the Bible does it say "out of chaos".
• God created the heavens... and the earth. Nowhere does the Bible say "out of chaos".

So while you favor those who make that claim, The Bible... does not support that view.
That is an important point to note.

And again, I'm not saying that there was something before creation, I'm just saying that the creation and Genesis was out of chaos.

Yes, you say that. The Bible does not say that. You do.
That is an important point.

And this is a key distinction. Jews of the talmudic period acknowledged that only God is eternal, but in their own writings, such as what I said it above, bereshith rabah 1:5, The creation in Genesis is out of chaos, it's not out of nothing.

The Midrash Bereshit Rabba, Parashah I, verse 5, is part of a larger interpretive framework that explores the creation narrative in Genesis 1:1. This section, like others in the parashah, is structured as a literary unit composed by a sophisticated editor who integrates various exegetical traditions to convey theological messages. The parashah begins with a petihah (opening) that links Genesis 1:1 to Proverbs 8:30, interpreting the word "amon" in Proverbs as "uman" (workman or craftsman), thereby portraying the Torah as God's working tool.

The specific content of Bereshit Rabba 1:5, as referenced in the context, involves a discussion about the creation of the world and the nature of its origins. It addresses the idea that the world was not created from pre-existing matter, countering views that suggest creation occurred from "tohu" (chaos) and "bohu" (void), which are described as forms of matter. The Midrash argues that to claim the world was created from such pre-existent material diminishes God's glory, emphasizing instead the concept of creatio ex nihilo (creation out of nothing). This interpretation is part of a broader theological effort to affirm God's absolute sovereignty over creation.

Additionally, the parashah includes teachings attributed to prominent rabbis such as R. Oshaya and R. Huna, who are cited in connection with the creation narrative.

Hmm. Did you get that?
A few things to note:

1. It does not support your position.
2. It's also an interpretation.
3. It's not the word of God... although the understanding that God did not create out of pre-existing matter, or out of chaos, is great, but the Bible is all we need for truth, and it does explain that God created out of his vigor; power; force; substance; energy.

The point to take away... The Bible is what establishes truth, Not interpretations of people.
The Bible explains the truths we need to know.

I'd be curious, I think that I've already done that, but if you have another approach, I'd be curious to see it.

You have done that?
Well I certainly did not get that from what you were saying.
From your entire argument, all I got was that God did not create out of nothing but out of chaos.
That's all I was getting. You even repeated it above.

The creation in Genesis is out of chaos, it's not out of nothing.

That does not address anything about whether the earth is young, or old.
Stay tuned.

And I think it's telling that the Jewish publication society translation, the JPS says " When God began to create".

That alone is enough to point out that verse 1 is not in and of itself an event. And thus, young earth creationism really has no basis.

You don't seem to like those other translations. I think they're legitimate. And that's really all you need to point out the issue with YECism.

See?
How does that address that Genesis 1, is not 6 24 hour days of creation?

 

[Job 33:6]

That was not the point I made.
I'm pointing out that God created out of something - his vigor; power; force; substance; energy.

I never denied any of this.

The idea that the world was created from pre-existing matter was generally rejected, as it was seen as incompatible with strict monotheism, which holds that God alone is eternal and self-sufficient.
Self efficient, is the key word here, as described by Isaiah at Isaiah 40:26

Again, ultimately, everyone agrees, God did create everything out of nothing. The question is, what is Genesis in particular, describing.

For example,

• God created water, Nowhere in the Bible does it say "out of chaos".
• God created the heavens... and the earth. Nowhere does the Bible say "out of chaos".

Chaos is just another term for "formless" or "void". Tohu wa bohu.

 

[Job 33:6]

That was not the point I made.
I'm pointing out that God created out of something - his vigor; power; force; substance; energy.


The idea that the world was created from pre-existing matter was generally rejected, as it was seen as incompatible with strict monotheism, which holds that God alone is eternal and self-sufficient.
Self efficient, is the key word here, as described by Isaiah at Isaiah 40:26

For example,

• God created water, Nowhere in the Bible does it say "out of chaos".
• God created the heavens... and the earth. Nowhere does the Bible say "out of chaos".

So while you favor those who make that claim, The Bible... does not support that view.
That is an important point to note.


Yes, you say that. The Bible does not say that. You do.
That is an important point.


The Midrash Bereshit Rabba, Parashah I, verse 5, is part of a larger interpretive framework that explores the creation narrative in Genesis 1:1. This section, like others in the parashah, is structured as a literary unit composed by a sophisticated editor who integrates various exegetical traditions to convey theological messages. The parashah begins with a petihah (opening) that links Genesis 1:1 to Proverbs 8:30, interpreting the word "amon" in Proverbs as "uman" (workman or craftsman), thereby portraying the Torah as God's working tool.

The specific content of Bereshit Rabba 1:5, as referenced in the context, involves a discussion about the creation of the world and the nature of its origins. It addresses the idea that the world was not created from pre-existing matter, countering views that suggest creation occurred from "tohu" (chaos) and "bohu" (void), which are described as forms of matter. The Midrash argues that to claim the world was created from such pre-existent material diminishes God's glory, emphasizing instead the concept of creatio ex nihilo (creation out of nothing). This interpretation is part of a broader theological effort to affirm God's absolute sovereignty over creation.

Additionally, the parashah includes teachings attributed to prominent rabbis such as R. Oshaya and R. Huna, who are cited in connection with the creation narrative.

Hmm. Did you get that?
Two things to note:
It does not support your position.
It's also an interpretation.
It's not the word of God... although the understanding that God did not create out of pre-existing matter, or out of chaos, is great, but the Bible is all we need for truth, and it does explain that God created out of his vigor; power; force; substance; energy.

The point to take away... The Bible is what establishes truth, Not interpretations of people.
The Bible explains the truths we need to know.


You have done that?
Well I certainly did not get that from what you were saying.
From your entire argument, all I got was that God did not create out of nothing but out of chaos.
That's all I was getting. You even repeated it above.

That does not address anything about whether the earth is young, or old.
Stay tuned.


See?
How does that address that Genesis 1, is not 6 24 hour days of creation?

I''m going to let AI summarize this, because I want you to see that it is not me just imaginging things. But simply copying and pasting Bereshit Rabbah 1:5 directly into AI analysis provides the following direct quotes that are plainly readable. I have eyeballs, I've read it, I see it, I know it is there. I want you to see that it is not just me, it's right there in the text:

From Google's AI text reviewer:

Bereshit Rabba 1:5, The source explicitly states that the earth began as "emptiness and disorder" (tohu vavohu). This understanding is derived from the verse in Genesis (1:1-2): "In the beginning, God created...from what? 'The earth was emptiness and disorder'".

The sources discuss the creation of the world from disorder, or "emptiness and disorder" (tohu va'vohu), primarily within the context of whether speaking about this origin is permissible or honors God.
Key points regarding creation out of disorder:
1. The Starting Material is Recognized: The text explicitly quotes Genesis 1:2, confirming the starting state of the world: "The earth was emptiness and disorder". This is the source from which God created, following the initial statement "In the beginning, God created".
2. Potential for Insult/Contempt: There is a concern that mentioning the world's origin in disorder is offensive to God's honor. The text offers a comparison:
◦ When a mortal king builds a palace in a location that was previously a place of sewers, refuse, or malodorous, stating this fact is generally considered an insult.
◦ Similarly, the text poses a rhetorical question, suggesting that anyone who says: ‘This world was created from emptiness and disorder,’ is this not an insult?.
3. Justification for Stating the Origin: Despite the potential for insult, Rav Huna, in the name of bar Kapara, explains that this fact must be stated because "Were the matter not written explicitly it would not have been possible to say it". The scriptural account itself reveals that God created from the state of "emptiness and disorder".
4. Context of Divine Honor: This discussion is framed by the opening of Psalms 31:19, concerning the silencing of "lying lips" that speak "harsh words" against the Eternal Righteous One. These "harsh words" (atak) are characterized as matters that God concealed from His creations. The text suggests bewilderment at those who might boast about expounding the act of Creation or show contempt for God's honor.
In summary, the sources confirm that the world originated from a state of "emptiness and disorder," but emphasize that this fact is only known because God revealed it in Scripture, and mentioning it runs the risk of showing contempt for the Divine honor, similar to insulting a builder by pointing out the foul ground upon which a magnificent structure was raised.
Furthermore, the sources consistently stress that God acted alone in the creation process. The creation was not spontaneous chaos yielding to order, but an intentional act of a sole creator, who looked in the Torah, which served as His artisan's tool (uman) or blueprint, to create the world. The Torah itself is considered to have preceded the world's creation.

And you can read Bereshit Rabba 1:5 right here, its pretty plainly stated:

Bereshit Rabbah 1:5

Rav Huna began in the name of bar Kapara: “May they be silenced [te’alamna], those lying lips [that speak harsh words against the righteous one with arrogance...

www.sefaria.org

If you want me to use my computer to provide screenshots or photographs of the text of Bereshit Rabba 1:5, so that you can see where it says the above, let me know and I will send you photographs or screenshots. But otherwise, if you have eyeballs, it is right there for you to see and to read.

 

[Job 33:6]

How does that address that Genesis 1, is not 6 24 hour days of creation?

It addresses YECism, because verse 1:1 is not itself an independent creation event. The event of creation unfolds over 6 days, out of disorder or chaos. As noted in Bereshit Rabba 1:5 above, as well as dozens of other sources that I've already provided.

Why does that matter? You cant have a young earth if the Bible doesnt say anything about when that earth came into existence. A disordered world is not a non-existent world.

 

[CoreyD]

If you add the “when,” it deletes the possibility that verse three is a new step in the process.

Thank you for that.

To use Job’s favorite metaphor, it is the difference between saying that the production of the pizza started with the planting of wheat and tomatoes and the production of milk or the operations in the kitchen.

In other words the process of planting of wheat and tomatoes and the production of milk is not part of the creation process.
Did I get it correct?

Both are valid, but I don’t think Moses was worried about the difference.

Can you please explain why the creation of the heavens and earth not being a part of the creation process valid?
Bear in mind you acknowledged, that Job's addition of when "deletes the possibility that verse three is a new step in the process".
Also, her argument removes the creation of the earth (not to mention the heavens)), which she admits, had to exist before Genesis 1:2.

The narrative starts with verse three, because that is when Moses starts teaching the relationship between God and man.

That's another interpretation, you are adding here.
I will dismiss that by simply saying the narrator begins at Genesis 1:1. "In the beginning, God...".

I finally see the disagreement. According to the registration, my car was manufactured in 1999. It is working fine. Anyway, its age is not based on when the iron was smelted or when the engineers designed it, it is based on when it was complete and ready to use. The earth was complete and ready to use on the sixth day. I don’t know how long Adam and Eve were in the garden, but they got evicted about 6000 years ago. I guess that would make me young earth, even if the previous days were a few million years.

Right, so the age of the earth is different to the age of the universe.
Genesis 1 and 2 are describing the whole package - the universe.
The OP focuses on the earth alone, and not the universe, but since Genesis 1 includes the earth, we can use that to establish if the earth is old or young.

You raised an issue here, that I don't think the OP's intent considers... that is, whether or not the earth being a few millions of years old matter.
I think I am safe to assume that the OP is interested only in the argument between Creationist that believe in a 6 24 hour days creation, as opposed to millions, or billions of years.
I don't think the OP is interested in an argument between millions of years or billions of years.
They can correct me if I am wrong.

 

[Job 33:6]

I''m going to let AI summarize this, because I want you to see that it is not me just imaginging things. But simply copying and pasting Bereshit Rabbah 1:5 directly into AI analysis provides the following direct quotes that are plainly readable. I have eyeballs, I've read it, I see it, I know it is there. I want you to see that it is not just me, it's right there in the text:

From Google's AI text reviewer:

Bereshit Rabba 1:5, The source explicitly states that the earth began as "emptiness and disorder" (tohu vavohu). This understanding is derived from the verse in Genesis (1:1-2): "In the beginning, God created...from what? 'The earth was emptiness and disorder'".

The sources discuss the creation of the world from disorder, or "emptiness and disorder" (tohu va'vohu), primarily within the context of whether speaking about this origin is permissible or honors God.
Key points regarding creation out of disorder:
1. The Starting Material is Recognized: The text explicitly quotes Genesis 1:2, confirming the starting state of the world: "The earth was emptiness and disorder". This is the source from which God created, following the initial statement "In the beginning, God created".
2. Potential for Insult/Contempt: There is a concern that mentioning the world's origin in disorder is offensive to God's honor. The text offers a comparison:
◦ When a mortal king builds a palace in a location that was previously a place of sewers, refuse, or malodorous, stating this fact is generally considered an insult.
◦ Similarly, the text poses a rhetorical question, suggesting that anyone who says: ‘This world was created from emptiness and disorder,’ is this not an insult?.
3. Justification for Stating the Origin: Despite the potential for insult, Rav Huna, in the name of bar Kapara, explains that this fact must be stated because "Were the matter not written explicitly it would not have been possible to say it". The scriptural account itself reveals that God created from the state of "emptiness and disorder".
4. Context of Divine Honor: This discussion is framed by the opening of Psalms 31:19, concerning the silencing of "lying lips" that speak "harsh words" against the Eternal Righteous One. These "harsh words" (atak) are characterized as matters that God concealed from His creations. The text suggests bewilderment at those who might boast about expounding the act of Creation or show contempt for God's honor.
In summary, the sources confirm that the world originated from a state of "emptiness and disorder," but emphasize that this fact is only known because God revealed it in Scripture, and mentioning it runs the risk of showing contempt for the Divine honor, similar to insulting a builder by pointing out the foul ground upon which a magnificent structure was raised.
Furthermore, the sources consistently stress that God acted alone in the creation process. The creation was not spontaneous chaos yielding to order, but an intentional act of a sole creator, who looked in the Torah, which served as His artisan's tool (uman) or blueprint, to create the world. The Torah itself is considered to have preceded the world's creation.

And you can read Bereshit Rabba 1:5 right here, its pretty plainly stated:

Bereshit Rabbah 1:5

Rav Huna began in the name of bar Kapara: “May they be silenced [te’alamna], those lying lips [that speak harsh words against the righteous one with arrogance...

www.sefaria.org

If you want me to use my computer to provide screenshots or photographs of the text of Bereshit Rabba 1:5, so that you can see where it says the above, let me know and I will send you photographs or screenshots. But otherwise, if you have eyeballs, it is right there for you to see and to read.

and one of the reasons this is a good text, is because it is explicitly the same conversation that we are having today, but it was held thousands of years ago, and these Jewish scholars captured it perfectly in their own writings. And these Rabbis, among others, excplitily note that it is indeed God honoring and Biblical, that is based on the Biblical text, in hebrew I'll add, that creation was done from what? From a disordered and empty world.

It's right there. Jewish Rabbis, 5th Century AD or earlier. It is there. @CoreyD. Whether or not you want to reject the position of these Jewish Rabbis is on you, but again, it is there. I am providing you with the information, and it is up to you whether or not you feel comfortable accepting the position of these Jewish Rabbis of ancient times on their opinion of the Torah.

 

[CoreyD]

It addresses YECism, because verse 1:1 is not itself an independent creation event. The event of creation unfolds over 6 days, out of disorder or chaos. As noted in Bereshit Rabba 1:5 above, as well as dozens of other sources that I've already provided.

The YEC knows that.
Regardless if Genesis 1:1 is not itself an independent creation event... which I don't think any of them argue, they say that each of the days in Genesis 1, is 24 hours long.
So, your argument does not address their belief.

Why does that matter? You cant have a young earth if the Bible doesnt say anything about when that earth came into existence. A disordered world is not a non-existent world.

If the argument, includes your idea that Genesis 1:1 is an introduction, how does not create any problem for a young earth and heaven, created only in 6 days that are each 24 hours long?

 

[CoreyD]

I''m going to let AI summarize this, because I want you to see that it is not me just imaginging things. But simply copying and pasting Bereshit Rabbah 1:5 directly into AI analysis provides the following direct quotes that are plainly readable. I have eyeballs, I've read it, I see it, I know it is there. I want you to see that it is not just me, it's right there in the text:

From Google's AI text reviewer:

Bereshit Rabba 1:5, The source explicitly states that the earth began as "emptiness and disorder" (tohu vavohu). This understanding is derived from the verse in Genesis (1:1-2): "In the beginning, God created...from what? 'The earth was emptiness and disorder'".

How do you read, J?
Read it again...
began as "emptiness and disorder" (tohu vavohu).
Not... began out of "emptiness and disorder" (tohu vavohu).

Those are two different statements.

 

[Job 33:6]

How do you read, J?
Read it again...
began as "emptiness and disorder" (tohu vavohu).
Not... began out of "emptiness and disorder" (tohu vavohu).

Those are two different statements.

Did you miss the context? It says, "From what" ? Creation from...what? The starting material is the formless and empty earth. It is not nothing.

 

[Job 33:6]

How do you read, J?
Read it again...
began as "emptiness and disorder" (tohu vavohu).
Not... began out of "emptiness and disorder" (tohu vavohu).

Those are two different statements.

Here, let me help you. I am copying directly from Bereshit Rabba 1:5:

Rav Huna said in the name of bar Kapara: Were the matter not written explicitly it would not have been possible to say it: “In the beginning, God created” (Genesis 1:1) – from what? “The earth was emptiness and disorder” (Genesis 1:2)."

From what? The answer: The earth was emptiness and disorder.

That's it.

 

[Job 33:6]

The YEC knows that.
Regardless if Genesis 1:1 is not itself an independent creation event... which I don't think any of them argue, they say that each of the days in Genesis 1, is 24 hours long.
So, your argument does not address their belief.


If the argument, includes your idea that Genesis 1:1 is an introduction, how does not create any problem for a young earth and heaven, created only in 6 days that are each 24 hours long?

Lets just read it again:

The way of the world is that when a flesh-and-blood king builds his palace in [a location that had been] a place of sewers, a place of refuse, and a malodorous place, anyone who comes and says: ‘This palace was built in a place of sewers, a place of refuse, and a malodorous place,’ is this not an insult? So, too, anyone who comes and says: ‘This world was created from emptiness and disorder,’ is this not an insult? This is a rhetorical question. Rav Huna said in the name of bar Kapara: Were the matter not written explicitly it would not have been possible to say it: “In the beginning, God created” (Genesis 1:1) – from what? “The earth was emptiness and disorder” (Genesis 1:2).

From what?

This palace was built in a place of sewers, a place of refuse...it was stinky and smelly and worthless. Just like the emptiness and disorder that the world was created from or out of.

It's saying that something beautiful was created out of, or from, something disgusting. The question is, Is that not an insult? To God?

The rabbis are questioning if it is God honoring that creation would occur out of disorder.

And then they continue on and to determine the answer, bar Kapara says "were the matter not explicitly written, it would not have been possible to say".

Then he goes on to say, God created...from what? The answer? The earth was emptiness and disorder. It was waste. And the palace was built from that waste.

 

[CoreyD]

I''m going to let AI summarize this, because I want you to see that it is not me just imaginging things. But simply copying and pasting Bereshit Rabbah 1:5 directly into AI analysis provides the following direct quotes that are plainly readable. I have eyeballs, I've read it, I see it, I know it is there. I want you to see that it is not just me, it's right there in the text:

From Google's AI text reviewer:

Bereshit Rabba 1:5, The source explicitly states that the earth began as "emptiness and disorder" (tohu vavohu). This understanding is derived from the verse in Genesis (1:1-2): "In the beginning, God created...from what? 'The earth was emptiness and disorder'".

The sources discuss the creation of the world from disorder, or "emptiness and disorder" (tohu va'vohu), primarily within the context of whether speaking about this origin is permissible or honors God.
Key points regarding creation out of disorder:
1. The Starting Material is Recognized: The text explicitly quotes Genesis 1:2, confirming the starting state of the world: "The earth was emptiness and disorder". This is the source from which God created, following the initial statement "In the beginning, God created".
2. Potential for Insult/Contempt: There is a concern that mentioning the world's origin in disorder is offensive to God's honor. The text offers a comparison:
◦ When a mortal king builds a palace in a location that was previously a place of sewers, refuse, or malodorous, stating this fact is generally considered an insult.
◦ Similarly, the text poses a rhetorical question, suggesting that anyone who says: ‘This world was created from emptiness and disorder,’ is this not an insult?.
3. Justification for Stating the Origin: Despite the potential for insult, Rav Huna, in the name of bar Kapara, explains that this fact must be stated because "Were the matter not written explicitly it would not have been possible to say it". The scriptural account itself reveals that God created from the state of "emptiness and disorder".
4. Context of Divine Honor: This discussion is framed by the opening of Psalms 31:19, concerning the silencing of "lying lips" that speak "harsh words" against the Eternal Righteous One. These "harsh words" (atak) are characterized as matters that God concealed from His creations. The text suggests bewilderment at those who might boast about expounding the act of Creation or show contempt for God's honor.
In summary, the sources confirm that the world originated from a state of "emptiness and disorder," but emphasize that this fact is only known because God revealed it in Scripture, and mentioning it runs the risk of showing contempt for the Divine honor, similar to insulting a builder by pointing out the foul ground upon which a magnificent structure was raised.
Furthermore, the sources consistently stress that God acted alone in the creation process. The creation was not spontaneous chaos yielding to order, but an intentional act of a sole creator, who looked in the Torah, which served as His artisan's tool (uman) or blueprint, to create the world. The Torah itself is considered to have preceded the world's creation.

And you can read Bereshit Rabba 1:5 right here, its pretty plainly stated:

Bereshit Rabbah 1:5

Rav Huna began in the name of bar Kapara: “May they be silenced [te’alamna], those lying lips [that speak harsh words against the righteous one with arrogance...

www.sefaria.org

If you want me to use my computer to provide screenshots or photographs of the text of Bereshit Rabba 1:5, so that you can see where it says the above, let me know and I will send you photographs or screenshots. But otherwise, if you have eyeballs, it is right there for you to see and to read.

These interpretations are ridiculous.
Why would anyone Christian or not, want to refer to them?

When were the angels created? Rabbi Yoḥanan said: The angels [malakhim] were created on the second day. That is what is written: “He covers His upper chambers with water…” (Psalms 104:3), and it is written: “He makes the winds His messengers [malakhav]” (Psalms 104:4).
Rabbi Ḥanina said: The angels were created on the fifth day. That is what is written: “Let birds fly [yeofef] over the earth…” (Genesis 1:20), and it is written [of the angels]: “And with two it would fly [yeofef]”​

 

[Job 33:6]

These interpretations are ridiculous.
Why would anyone Christian or not, want to refer to them?

When were the angels created? Rabbi Yoḥanan said: The angels [malakhim] were created on the second day. That is what is written: “He covers His upper chambers with water…” (Psalms 104:3), and it is written: “He makes the winds His messengers [malakhav]” (Psalms 104:4).​

Rabbi Ḥanina said: The angels were created on the fifth day. That is what is written: “Let birds fly [yeofef] over the earth…” (Genesis 1:20), and it is written [of the angels]: “And with two it would fly [yeofef]”​

@CoreyD
Here, I've color-coded the text to help highlight what it is saying, why do you think they are talking about a palace being made out of sewers in parallel to creation out of disorder?

Let's just read it again:

The way of the world is that when a flesh-and-blood king builds his palace in [a location that had been] a place of sewers, a place of refuse, and a malodorous place, anyone who comes and says: ‘This palace was built in a place of sewers, a place of refuse, and a malodorous place,’ is this not an insult? So, too, anyone who comes and says: ‘This world was created from emptiness and disorder,’ is this not an insult? This is a rhetorical question. Rav Huna said in the name of bar Kapara: Were the matter not written explicitly it would not have been possible to say it: “In the beginning, God created” (Genesis 1:1) – from what? “The earth was emptiness and disorder” (Genesis 1:2).

From what?

This palace was built in a place of sewers, a place of refuse...it was stinky and smelly and worthless. Just like the emptiness and disorder that the world was created from or out of.

It's saying that something beautiful was created out of, or from, something disgusting. The question is, Is that not an insult? To God?

The rabbis are questioning if it is God honoring that creation would occur out of disorder.

And then they continue on and to determine the answer, bar Kapara says "were the matter not explicitly written, it would not have been possible to say".

Then he goes on to say, God created...from what? The answer? The earth was emptiness and disorder. It was waste. And the palace was built from that waste. Just as creation occurred out of disorder.

These Jewish Rabbis just can't say it more plainly.

 

[CoreyD]

Here, let me help you. I am copying directly from Bereshit Rabba 1:5:

Rav Huna said in the name of bar Kapara: Were the matter not written explicitly it would not have been possible to say it: “In the beginning, God created” (Genesis 1:1) – from what? “The earth was emptiness and disorder” (Genesis 1:2)."

From what? The answer: The earth was emptiness and disorder.

That's it.

J. Let go of those emotions and focus.
Let your mind take in what you read.
So, too, anyone who comes and says: ‘This world was created from emptiness and disorder,’ is this not an insult? This is a rhetorical question. Rav Huna said in the name of bar Kapara: Were the matter not written explicitly it would not have been possible to say it: “In the beginning, God created” (Genesis 1:1) – from what? “The earth was emptiness and disorder” (Genesis 1:2).
Explain his argument, J.