Inspired data is not reproduced in the sufficiency of Inspired information. Therefore, to worship the data of a Translation is to commit a basic hermeneutical error.
There is something wrong within the self-professedly most Conservative segment of Christianity. It has to do with something which many in this segment make of Genesis 1:1. Specifically, it is about what they like to believe is the Bible's first idea. More specifically, it is an idolatry of the English word-order of the verse:
This is NOT the word-order of the Hebrew:
Notice that this Hebrew word-order puts 'God' in the center between anticipation and fulfillment.
The English word-order, on the other hand, suggests the idea that God is more essentially aloof than He is the genuinely generous creator of the things we naturally recognize as good.
The Hebrew word-order implies a direct relation between the Creator and the Creation, and this a benevolent, even intimate relation. The English word-order, by contrast, suggests that the first idea the Bible teaches is that,
Yet it has become fashionable among the more dogmatic kinds of Christians to worship the English word-order of Genesis 1:1, as if the verse has an implicit preamble that is more important than even the English syntax approximating the Hebrew meaning: 'In the beginning, God created...'. Thus:
The point here is graphic, like a primitive sign language, not syntactic according to a verbal language. It is a consideration of the English word order as being more important than the English syntax.
A syntax is a convention of meaning-to-word-order. But word-order without syntax is just word order. And word-order, by itself, suggests its own priority, regardless of the convention of syntax-to-meaning.
But it is the Hebrew word-order of v. 1 that is in keeping with the Hebrew syntax of the whole chapter. The English word-order, on the other hand, undercuts the English syntax. Thus, the first idea presented by the English word-order is contrary to the first idea presented by the English syntax. And even the English syntax is but a pale shadow of the depth of the Hebrew.
Therefore, there is NO English version of Genesis chapter 1 (not even the Authorized King James version) that completely represents the power of the Hebrew text.
Fortunately, it is by our everyday natural most broad sense of things, not by some 'Platonic' worshipfulness, that Genesis 1 seems to us to teach that God created in six days. In other words, it is by our own natural context that the account seems plainly to affirm our everyday normal life-centric terrestrial values of the day-night cycle, the water cycle, etc.. The account thereby even seems to begin with a concern for the wider cosmos and our actual Earth; then for our Earth's actual water; its day-night cycle; its water cycle; its air' its land and seas; etc.. Thus, as the account seems to progress, it goes from the more general things to the more and more special things, ending with us, humans. Like this:
This seven-fold recursion shows that, contrary to either a godless or a Platonic cum Deistic outlook, Genesis 1:1 is concerned primarily to affirm the fact that, since the Living God designed and created us, we not only are not insignificant, we are the central value of the entire account and of the entire cosmos. For, this view of v. 1 sets the theme for the rest of the account.
Even more, this seven-fold recursion fits the fact that the account conspicuously lacks mention of any material origin for humans, and only for humans. This uniquely human lack of such mention at once (A) poses humans as transcending the Earth and (B) as implying that such mention is to be anticipated, as a completion to the first chapter. Per 7, this anticipation is fulfilled in Genesis chapter 2.
There is something wrong within the self-professedly most Conservative segment of Christianity. It has to do with something which many in this segment make of Genesis 1:1. Specifically, it is about what they like to believe is the Bible's first idea. More specifically, it is an idolatry of the English word-order of the verse:
In the beginning God |
created |
the Heaven and the Earth.
created |
the Heaven and the Earth.
This is NOT the word-order of the Hebrew:
In the beginning created |
| God
| the heaven and the Earth.
| God
| the heaven and the Earth.
Notice that this Hebrew word-order puts 'God' in the center between anticipation and fulfillment.
The English word-order, on the other hand, suggests the idea that God is more essentially aloof than He is the genuinely generous creator of the things we naturally recognize as good.
The Hebrew word-order implies a direct relation between the Creator and the Creation, and this a benevolent, even intimate relation. The English word-order, by contrast, suggests that the first idea the Bible teaches is that,
- 'In the beginning God.' ('So you better cow to Him.', and, or, 'He is aloof.')
Yet it has become fashionable among the more dogmatic kinds of Christians to worship the English word-order of Genesis 1:1, as if the verse has an implicit preamble that is more important than even the English syntax approximating the Hebrew meaning: 'In the beginning, God created...'. Thus:
Preamble: 'In the beginning God.' ('So you better cow to Him.', and, or, 'He is aloof.')
The point here is graphic, like a primitive sign language, not syntactic according to a verbal language. It is a consideration of the English word order as being more important than the English syntax.
A syntax is a convention of meaning-to-word-order. But word-order without syntax is just word order. And word-order, by itself, suggests its own priority, regardless of the convention of syntax-to-meaning.
But it is the Hebrew word-order of v. 1 that is in keeping with the Hebrew syntax of the whole chapter. The English word-order, on the other hand, undercuts the English syntax. Thus, the first idea presented by the English word-order is contrary to the first idea presented by the English syntax. And even the English syntax is but a pale shadow of the depth of the Hebrew.
Therefore, there is NO English version of Genesis chapter 1 (not even the Authorized King James version) that completely represents the power of the Hebrew text.
Fortunately, it is by our everyday natural most broad sense of things, not by some 'Platonic' worshipfulness, that Genesis 1 seems to us to teach that God created in six days. In other words, it is by our own natural context that the account seems plainly to affirm our everyday normal life-centric terrestrial values of the day-night cycle, the water cycle, etc.. The account thereby even seems to begin with a concern for the wider cosmos and our actual Earth; then for our Earth's actual water; its day-night cycle; its water cycle; its air' its land and seas; etc.. Thus, as the account seems to progress, it goes from the more general things to the more and more special things, ending with us, humans. Like this:
1. the general cosmos and the special Earth.
2. The Earth, as its own general subject, implying that which we all intuit is most valuable about the Earth unto itself in all the cosmos: its abiding maximal abundance of open liquid water.
3. that water and its special relation to the Sun's light, hence the water cycle;
4. The water cycle and its special beneficiary and member, biology;
5. biology and its special category, animal biology (plant/animal/mineral = animal);
6. Animal biology and its special category, human;
7. The man and the woman wife (Genesis 2:21-23)
2. The Earth, as its own general subject, implying that which we all intuit is most valuable about the Earth unto itself in all the cosmos: its abiding maximal abundance of open liquid water.
3. that water and its special relation to the Sun's light, hence the water cycle;
4. The water cycle and its special beneficiary and member, biology;
5. biology and its special category, animal biology (plant/animal/mineral = animal);
6. Animal biology and its special category, human;
7. The man and the woman wife (Genesis 2:21-23)
This seven-fold recursion shows that, contrary to either a godless or a Platonic cum Deistic outlook, Genesis 1:1 is concerned primarily to affirm the fact that, since the Living God designed and created us, we not only are not insignificant, we are the central value of the entire account and of the entire cosmos. For, this view of v. 1 sets the theme for the rest of the account.
Even more, this seven-fold recursion fits the fact that the account conspicuously lacks mention of any material origin for humans, and only for humans. This uniquely human lack of such mention at once (A) poses humans as transcending the Earth and (B) as implying that such mention is to be anticipated, as a completion to the first chapter. Per 7, this anticipation is fulfilled in Genesis chapter 2.
