Young's Literal Translation and Gen 1

[loDebar]

Young relates how the Hebrew sentace structure differs as presented in most translations as shown in Gen 1:1

Here is a copy of an explanation from Wiki and a preface:

Young's translation is closer to the Hebrew than the better-known versions of this passage in English. The Revised Standard Version (RSV), which is based on Biblia Hebraica Stuttgartensia, for example, treats –3 in this way:
1 In the beginning God created the heavens and the earth.
2 The earth was without form and void, and darkness was upon the face of the deep; and the Spirit of God was moving over the face of the waters.
3 And God said, "Let there be light"; and there was light.[3]
Bereshith bara elohim, the RSV's "In the beginning God created...", is in the construct state (bereshith), not the absolute (barishona), meaning it refers to an action in progress, not to a completed act. Similarly, there is no license in the Hebrew for the RSV's division of these verses into three sentences (ancient Hebrew lacked punctuation, and sentence divisions have to be inferred), as the order of the words wa ha-aretz hayetha (subject-verb) points to the rendering "the earth being" (Young's "the earth hath existed"), while the RSV's "and the earth was" requires words in the order wa tehi ha-aretz (verb-subject).[4] Young's usage of English present tense rather than past tense has been supported by scholars ranging from the medieval Jewish rabbi Rashi (who advised, "f you are going to interpret [this passage] in its plain sense, interpret it thus: At the beginning of the creation of heaven and earth, when the earth was (or the earth being) unformed and void . . . God said, ‘Let there be light.’") to Richard Elliott Friedman in his translation of the Five Books in "The Bible with Sources Revealed" (2002).[

Please consider the implications. I rely on the opinions of those familiar with Hebrew

I believe it shows the first action or creation mentioned was not the"heavens and earth" but light in v 3.

 

[TCassidy]

The first three verses of Genesis 1 are little understood by most Christians.

Verse 1 is the title of the book of Genesis. It basically tells us what the story following is all about.

1. In the beginning God created the Heavens and the Earth.
- Here is what we are going to talk about.

2. The earth was formless and empty. Darkness was on the surface of the deep and God’s Spirit was hovering over the surface of the waters.
- This verse is what is known as a circumstantial clause. It relates the circumstances at the beginning of the story.

It is similar to "A man was walking down the street and turned into a pharmacy." The circumstantial clause is that "a man was walking down the street." That tells us what was going on (the circumstances) when our story starts.

The circumstances outlined in verse 2 is that the Earth was unformed (tohu) and unfilled (bohu). Darkness reigned and God's Spirit was present.
Verse 2 begins with what is called a waw disjunctive. The waw disjunctive can be identified by the attaching of a waw to a noun. In this case waw·ha·’a·res (And the Earth). When a waw is used with a noun the waw disjunctive results.

The disjunctive disconnects verse 1 from verse 2. There is no logical or chronological connection between verse 1 and verse 2.

So, the bible does not tell us when verse 1 occurred. Only that it already existed when the story starts in verse 3. And God said, “Let there be light,” and there was light.

Now note that the waw that begins verse 3 is attached to the verb. "Said God" (waw·yo·mer e·lo·him). When the waw is attached to a verb it means verse 3 follows both logically and chronologically immediately after verse
2. This is called a waw consecutive.

So, is there room for a gap? Such a gap is meaningless as far as the narrative is concerned. Nothing other than the unformed and unfilled ball of dirt in perpetual darkness existed until God, in verse 3, began to form the unformed and fill the unfilled.

No life of any sort was possible as the penalty for sin, death, had not yet been passed on creation.

So, the bible does not tell us how long ago verse 1 happened. In fact, verse 1 is not temporal. It is divorced from the time line and is included only as a synoptic title for the Creation narrative.

But the idea of the gap theory is idiotic. It ignores both the grammar of the Hebrew and the theology of the narrative itself.

From verse 3 until the end of chapter 1 every verse save one starts with a waw attached to a verb making each verse follow, logically and chronologically, the verse before it.

So,
Verse 1: Here is what we are going to talk about.
Verse 2: Here are the circumstances when our story starts.
Verses 3 and following: Here is how God formed the unformed and filled the unfilled.

 

[loDebar]

Dr Friedman is a Hebrew scholar writing several books on the origin of the Bible
His thoughts":

At the beginning of the creation of heaven and earth, when the earth was (or the earth being) unformed and void . . . God said, ‘Let there be light.’") to Richard Elliott Friedman in his translation of the Five Books in "The Bible with Sources Revealed" (2002)

Is their any difference from your post?

Comments on the waw conversive:

Waw Conversive" A Fiction -- Not a Fact.
THE doctrine of "Waw Conversive," according to the common Hebrew Grammars, is:--

• "The past tense with the prefix waw, expresses future time when preceded by a verb in the future or by an imperative." And again:--
• "The future tense, with the prefix waw, and dagesh in the following letter, is used to express the past." [See the Grammars of Hurwitz, Gesenius, &c.]

The objections to this doctrine may be summed up in four particulars:--

1. It is insufficient to explain the many thousands of passages in the Hebrew Bible where a past tense is preceded neither by a future nor by an imperative, yet where it is "converted" in the Common English Bible, and with as much propriety as in any of those instances that are supposed to be indisputable: e.g.
   Ge. 3.12, "This (is) the token of the covenant that I am making between Me and you ... my bow I have set in the cloud, and it hath become the token of the covenant ... and it hath come to pass ... and it hath been seen ... and I have remembered ... and the waters do no more," &c.
   Ge. 17.4, " Lo, My covenant (is) with thee, and thou hast become the father of a multitude of nations."
   The true solution of the principle involved in these passages is: That the Hebrews were in the habit of expressing the certainty of an action taking place by putting it in the past tense (see particularly Ge. 23.11, "I have given ... I have given ... I have given;" also in verse 13, "I have given"), taking its fulfilment for granted.
   
   
2. It leads to results rather startling, viz. that most, if not all, of the Hebrew particles are conversive! Grammarians have already been driven to admit, or rather assert, that az then, and terem not yet, are conversive as well as waw.

I agree the disconnect but also the translation of yom.

This quote is most important and agrees with Youngs
the bible does not tell us when verse 1 occurred. Only that it already existed when the story starts in verse 3. And God said, “Let there be light,” and there was light.

Is overall Youngs translation good?

 

[TCassidy]

This quote is most important and agrees with Youngs
the bible does not tell us when verse 1 occurred. Only that it already existed when the story starts in verse 3. And God said, “Let there be light,” and there was light.

Yeah. It would be important if we were talking about a Waw Conversive. We're not. We're talking about a waw-disjunctive.

The conversive (also called consecutive) links two verses together.

The disjunctive does exactly the opposite.

 

[loDebar]

got it

you seem to agree the first creation of this story is Light, not the universe

 

[TCassidy]

The circumstantial clause seems to me to say that the raw materials for the yet to be completed earth existed prior to light, the creation of which followed the circumstantial clause both logically and chronologically.

If the earth wasn't created in verse 1, when was it created?

 

[Deacon]

The best way to find out how experts in Hebrew would translate the first few verses on Genesis is to examine a variety of translations.

You'll find quite a variety among translations... all by experts in Hebrew.
​

Genesis 1:1–3 (YLT)
1 In the beginning of God’s preparing the heavens and the earth— 2 the earth hath existed waste and void, and darkness is on the face of the deep, and the Spirit of God fluttering on the face of the waters.
3 And God saith, ‘Let light be;’ and light is.

(LEB)
1 In the beginning, God created the heavens and the earth— 2 Now the earth was formless and empty, and darkness was over the face of the deep. And the Spirit of God was hovering over the surface of the waters. 3 And God said, “Let there be light!” And there was light.

(NRSV)
1 In the beginning when God created the heavens and the earth, 2 the earth was a formless void and darkness covered the face of the deep, while a wind from God swept over the face of the waters. 3 Then God said, “Let there be light”; and there was light.

(Tanakh)
1 When God began to create heaven and earth—2 the earth being unformed and void, with darkness over the surface of the deep and a wind from God sweeping over the water—3 God said, “Let there be light”; and there was light.​

​

Another option for examining the grammar of Genesis might be a commentary search

Gordon Wenham writes in Word Biblical Commentary, Genesis (.11)

“In the beginning God created.” The stark simplicity of this, the traditional translation, disguises a complex and protracted debate about the correct interpretation of vv 1–3. Four possible understandings of the syntax of these verses have been defended.​

1. V 1 is a temporal clause subordinate to the main clause in v 2: “In the beginning when God created …, the earth was without form.…”

2. V 1 is a temporal clause subordinate to the main clause in v 3 (v 2 is a parenthetic comment). “In the beginning when God created … (now the earth was formless) God said.…”

3. V 1 is a main clause, summarizing all the events described in vv 2–31. It is a title to the chapter as a whole, and could be rendered “In the beginning God was the creator of heaven and earth.” What being creator of heaven and earth means is then explained in more detail in vv 2–31.

4. V 1 is a main clause describing the first act of creation. Vv 2 and 3 describe subsequent phases in God’s creative activity. This is the traditional view adopted in our translation.​

I follow Michael Heiser, an ancient language expert at Logos Bible Software.
He has an interesting article; one of its goals is to simply explain the grammar difficulties of Genesis 1.

Creation, Evolution, Intelligent Design, and the Replicating Universe: What Does the Hebrew Text of Genesis 1 Allow? [LINK] by Michael S. Heiser, PhD, Hebrew Bible and Semitic Languages​

Lots of information to digest there

Recognize that there are many grammatical opinions by experts.

Rob

 

[loDebar]

The universe and the planet earth had to exist in darkness without form and void

It had to be made in connection with
Jde 1:6

And the angels which kept not their first estate, but left their own habitation, he hath reserved in everlasting chains under darkness unto the judgment of the great day.

Because there is no darkness in Heaven, it had to be created for the angels to have been sent there.

 

[loDebar]

The best way to find out how experts in Hebrew would translate the first few verses on Genesis is to examine a variety of translations.

You'll find quite a variety among translations... all by experts in Hebrew.
​

Genesis 1:1–3 (YLT)
1 In the beginning of God’s preparing the heavens and the earth— 2 the earth hath existed waste and void, and darkness is on the face of the deep, and the Spirit of God fluttering on the face of the waters.
3 And God saith, ‘Let light be;’ and light is.

(LEB)
1 In the beginning, God created the heavens and the earth— 2 Now the earth was formless and empty, and darkness was over the face of the deep. And the Spirit of God was hovering over the surface of the waters. 3 And God said, “Let there be light!” And there was light.

(NRSV)
1 In the beginning when God created the heavens and the earth, 2 the earth was a formless void and darkness covered the face of the deep, while a wind from God swept over the face of the waters. 3 Then God said, “Let there be light”; and there was light.

(Tanakh)
1 When God began to create heaven and earth—2 the earth being unformed and void, with darkness over the surface of the deep and a wind from God sweeping over the water—3 God said, “Let there be light”; and there was light.​

​

Another option for examining the grammar of Genesis might be a commentary search

Gordon Wenham writes in Word Biblical Commentary, Genesis (.11)

“In the beginning God created.” The stark simplicity of this, the traditional translation, disguises a complex and protracted debate about the correct interpretation of vv 1–3. Four possible understandings of the syntax of these verses have been defended.​

1. V 1 is a temporal clause subordinate to the main clause in v 2: “In the beginning when God created …, the earth was without form.…”

2. V 1 is a temporal clause subordinate to the main clause in v 3 (v 2 is a parenthetic comment). “In the beginning when God created … (now the earth was formless) God said.…”

3. V 1 is a main clause, summarizing all the events described in vv 2–31. It is a title to the chapter as a whole, and could be rendered “In the beginning God was the creator of heaven and earth.” What being creator of heaven and earth means is then explained in more detail in vv 2–31.

4. V 1 is a main clause describing the first act of creation. Vv 2 and 3 describe subsequent phases in God’s creative activity. This is the traditional view adopted in our translation.​

I follow Michael Heiser, an ancient language expert at Logos Bible Software.
He has an interesting article; one of its goals is to simply explain the grammar difficulties of Genesis 1.

Creation, Evolution, Intelligent Design, and the Replicating Universe: What Does the Hebrew Text of Genesis 1 Allow? [LINK] by Michael S. Heiser, PhD, Hebrew Bible and Semitic Languages​

Lots of information to digest there

Recognize that there are many grammatical opinions by experts.

Rob

They agree, though the earth existed before there was light but no mention of the universe being created.
The initial creation is not part of the narrative, the focus is on having a place for man

 

[Deacon]

don't know why I'm getting the cross out line

 

[Deacon]

Recognize that the word translated ‘earth’ [eretz] also means land.

The context reveals the meaning. Sometimes times the context doesn’t help much and the meaning is unclear.
Most uses of the word eretz in Genesis refer to dry ground, land (c.f. Genesis 1:10).

The word for heaven also has dual meaning.
Shamayim translated heaven also refers to the open space about the land. The realm of clouds, the sun and moon and the stars. The birds fly in the shamayim.

There are many word plays within the first chapter that make the text beautifully intricate and challengingly complex.

Rob

 

[TCassidy]

The best way to find out how experts in Hebrew would translate the first few verses on Genesis is to examine a variety of translations.

No, the best way is to go to seminary and learn Hebrew, including grammar and syntax.

Another option for examining the grammar of Genesis might be a commentary search

Or you could learn Hebrew.

I follow Michael Heiser, an ancient language expert at Logos Bible Software.

I follow the Holy Spirit Who inspired the Hebrew of Genesis 1:1-3.

(PS: Nothing personal. Just decided to pick on you a bit. I was getting bored. )

 

[HankD]

just a thought: The scripture speaks of the "rising and going down" of the sun.

The LORD did not go into a scientific treatise concerning the titled rotation of the spherical earth on its axis combined with its orbital path giving us a visual truth of the sun "rise" or sun "set".

Labeling myself, I personally am a young earth 6 solar day (actually "sidereal day") creationist.

But because of the LORD not going into great detail about other scientific technicalities, I don't have a big problem with those believers who are creationists but choose to define the Hebrew word yom (day) as an indefinite time span (underline "big" problem). Just a little issue.