Supplements Pentateuchal Traditions in the

to the Late Second Temple Period

Journal for the Study Proceedings of the International Workshop in Tokyo,

August28-31,2007
of judaism

Editor
Edited by
Benjamin G. Wright, III
Akio Moriya
Department of Religion Studies, Lehigh University
Gohei Hata
Associate Editors

Florentino Garda Martinez

Qumran Institute, University of Groningen

Hindy Najman
Yale University and Department and Centre for the Study of Religion,
University of Toronto

Advisory Board
G. BORAK- J.J. COLLINS- J. DUHAIME- P.W. VANDER HORST-
A.K. PETERSEN- M. POPOVIC- J.T.A.G.M. VAN RUITEN-
].SIEVERS- G. STEMBERGER- E.J.C. TIGCHELAAR-
ｾＮＬｴＭｇ＠ 'o,....,
J. MAGLIANO-TROMP ,.
<- ....
\"'" I -
? .,.
'<' c.,
. I 6 8) .

VOLUME 158
BRILL

LEIDEN · BOSTON
The titles published in this series are listed at brill.nl/jsjs 2012
 CONTENTS

Acknowledgements..................................................... xr
Opening Address to the International Workshop ...................... XIII

PART I

PENTATEUCHAL TRADITIONS

The Doctrine of Creation ex nihilo and the Translation of tohu

wiibohu . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
Toshio David Tsumura
One Decalogue in Different Texts . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 23
Yuichi Osumi
The Evolutionary Growth of the Pentateuch in the Second Temple
Period .............................................................. 39
Eugene Ulrich
The Scribal and Textual Transmission of the Torah Analyzed in Light
of Its Sanctity....................................................... 57
EmanuelTov

PART II

HELLENISTIC JUDAISM AND THE PENTATEUCH

In the Beginning was a Greek Translation of Genesis and Exodus. . . . . . 7 5

GoheiHata
Which Version of the Greek Bible did Philo Read? . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 89
Gregory E. Sterling
The Importance of the Latter Half of] osephus's ]udaean Antiquities
for His Roman Audience ........................................... 129
Steve Mason
VIII CONTENTS CONTENTS IX

PART III Apocrypha .......................................................... 284

New Testament ..................................................... 285
DEAD SEA SCROLLS AND THE PENTATEUCH
Pseudepigraphica .................................................. 286
Dead Sea Scrolls .................................................... 288
The Interpretation of Genesis in the Dead Sea Scrolls .................. 157
Philo and josephus ................................................. 292
john] Collins
Rabbinic Texts ...................................................... 297
Exegesis ofPentateuchal Legislation inJubilees and Related Texts Classical Authors and Works ....................................... 297
Found at Qumran .................................................. 177
james C. VanderKam
The Pentateuch Reflected in the Aramaic Documents of the Dead
Sea Scrolls .......................................................... 201
AkioMoriya

PARTN

THE NEW TESTAMENT AND THE PENTATEUCH

The Septuagint and the Transition of the Gospel Traditions ........... 215
MigakuSato
The Reception of the Torah in Mark: The Question about the
Greatest Commandment ........................................... 227
Adela Yarbro Collins
Creation and Sacred Space: The Reuse of Key Pentateuchal Themes
by Philo, the Fourth Evangelist, and the Epistle to the Hebrews ... 243
Harold W Attridge

SPECIAL CONTRIBUTION

A Geographical Horizon in the Textual Transmission of

Pentateuch-Searching for Further Points of Contact between
East and West ...................................................... 259
Yutaka Ikeda

INDICES

Index of Modern Authors ............................................... 271

Index of Ancient Sources ............................................... 276
Hebrew Bible ....................................................... 276
Ancient Texts ....................................................... 284
 THE DOCTRINE OF CREATION EX NIHILO
AND THE TRANSLATION OF TOHUWABOHU

David Toshio Tsumura

A. Is creatio ex nihilo a Biblical Concept?

1. Doctrine ofcreatio ex nihilo

The Christian church has long held the doctrine of creatio ex nihilo ("cre-
ation out of nothing"), though the phrase itself does not appear in the Bible.
For example, the Westminister Confession of Faith (1646) asserts that "It
pleased God ... in the beginning, to create or make of nothing the world,
and all things therein" (IV.I). Augustine, in his Confessions 12. 7, held that God
"created heaven and earth out of nothing (de nihilo )." 1
This doctrine, as G. May explains, holds "the absolutely unconditioned
nature of the creation" and "specifies God's omnipotence as its sole
ground." 2 Hence, creatio ex nihilo generally implies that all things are onto-
logically dependent upon God and that the universe had a beginning.
Thus, the Christian doctrine of creatio ex nihilo holds that God created the
universe without preexisting materials. "This counteracts the pantheistic
implication that matter is eternal, as well as the dualistic implication that
another kind of power stands eternally over against God." 3
According to G. May, this doctrine of creatio ex nihilo "emerges only as
the result of the church's struggle with Platonism and its extreme form,
Gnosticism." 4 This early Christian anti-Gnostic controversy reached its peak
during the second half of the 2nd century AD when Irenaeus was refuting the
Gnostic philosophical teachings. He says:

1
C.E. Gunton, The Triune Creator: A Historical and Systematic Study (Edinburgh Studies
in Constructive Theology; Edinburgh: Edinburgh Univ. Press, 1998), 73-86.
2
G. May, Creatio ex Nihilo: The Doctrine of 'Creation out of Nothing' in Early Christian
Thought (Edinburgh: T. & T. Clark, 1994), xi.
3
T.C. Oden, Systematic Theology. Volume One: The Living God (San Francisco: Harper &
Row, 1987), 227.
4 May, Creatio ex Nihilo, 164-178. See Gun ton, The Triune Creator, 15, n. 2.
4 DAVID TOSHIO TSUMURA THE DOCTRINE OF CREATION EX NIHILO 5

But the things established are distinct from Him who has established them, 3· Hellenistic judaism
and what [things] have been made from Him who has made them. For He
is Himself uncreated, both without beginning and end, and lacking nothing. However, recently, J.C. O'Neill argued that "there is evidence that the doc-
He is Himself sufficient for this very thing, existence; but the things which trine of creatio ex nihilo was already formulated as a credal statement by the
have been made by Him have received a beginning ... He indeed who made time of the New Testament. If so, that would explain why there is nothing
all things can alone, together with His Word, properly be termed God and in the New Testament to contradict creatio ex nihilo."7
Lord; but the things which have been made cannot have this term applied
According to O'Neill, in 2 Mac. 7:28 the mother of the seven sons alluded
to them, neither should they justly assume that appellation which belongs to
the Creator. 5 to a credal formulation. 8 It reads:
｣ｘｾｬｗ＠ O"E TElCVOV ｣ｘｖｃｾａｅ｜ｪｊｔ＠ ､ｾ＠ TOV oupcxvov xcxi TI)v yijv xcxi 'reX EV ｃｘｕｔｏｬｾ＠ miv-rcx
Thus, the doctrine of creatio ex nihilo was well established during his time
i06v-rcx yvwvcxl o-rl oux ｅｾ＠ ov-rwv brotY)O"EV cxu-ra 6 ＸｅＶｾ＠ xcxi -ro -rwv &v8pwnwv ｹｴｶｯｾ＠
and it was clearly asserted that the world was not coeternal with the God of
oihw y[vETCXl
the Bible.
I beg you, my child, to look at the heaven and the earth and see everything
that is in them, and recognize that God did not make them out of things that
2. Biblical Basis ofcreatio ex nihilo existed (oux ｅｾ＠ ov-rwv ). And in the same way the human race came into being.
(NRSV)
The New Testament passages such as Eph. 3:8-g, Rev. 4:11 and Col. 1:16
explain God as the "Creator of all things." This idea is already in the Old Though there is no phrase such as "creatio ex nihilo" here, it can be argued
Testament, especially in Isa. 40ff. in expressions such as Isa 44:24, that the virtually same idea is expressed.
I am the LORD, who made all things (I;>:, :"lo/!.1), One of the DSS, the "Rule of the Community" scroll (1QS) III, 15-16 says:

and injer 10:16 ( =Jer 51:19) 15) ... From the God of knowledge (rml'i:"l l:>N) stems all there is and all there
shall be. Before they existed he established their entire design. 16) And when
for he is the one who formed all things (N1:"1 l;>:,;:t Ｌｾ［ＧＭＺＡｬ＠ ), (REB: "the creator of they have come into being, at their appointed time, they will execute all their
the universe"). works according to his glorious design, without altering anything ... 9
However, it has been asserted that the view of God as the "Creator of all
Here we find neither dualism nor the doctrine of the eternity of matter as
things" itself does not prove that God created all things "out of nothing."
in the Greek philosophy. What is expressed here is virtually same as the
Some scholars, including May/ claim that, strictly speaking, the doctrine
doctrine of creatio ex nihilo.
of creatio ex nihilo is not supported even by He b. 11:3,
ma-rEl VOOUJ-LEV XCXTY)p-r[a8w ｔｏｕｾ＠ ｣ｸｩｷｶｾ＠ ｐｾｊＭｬｃｘｔ＠ 8EOU, 4· Not a Biblical Concept?
ｅｴｾ＠ TO ｊＭｬｾ＠ EX ipCXlVOJ-lEVWV TO ｾａｅＱｴｏｊＭｬｖ＠ YEYOVEVCXl.
However, in the modem era, especially during the past 100 years, it has
By faith we understand t!Iat the universe was created by the word of God,
so that what is seen was not made out of things t!Iat are visible. (ESV) been claimed that "Creation 'out of nothing' is not a biblical concept." 10
For example, process theologians deny that God created out of absolute
and Rom. 4:17, nothingness but affirm instead a doctrine of creation out of"eternal" chaos
ｸ｣Ｘｷｾ＠ ytypcxn-rcxl o-rl ncx-rEpcx not:Awv E8vwv -rE8ELxci aE, xcx-rtvcxv-rl ou En[a-rEuaEv to be the biblical concept. They assert that the doctrine of creatio ex nihilo
9EoD TOU Ｈ｣ｰｯＱｴｏｬｕｖｔｾ＠ ｔｏｕｾ＠ ｖｅｸｰｯｵｾ＠ xcxi ｘｃａｏｕｖｔｾ＠ TCt ｊＭｬｾ＠ OVTCX ｷｾ＠ OVTCX.
as it is written, "I have made you the father of many nations"-in the presence
of the God in whom he believed, who gives life to the dead and calls into
7].C. O'Neill, "How Early is the Doctrine of creatio ex nihilo?" ]TS 53 ( 2002 ): 462.
existence the things that do not exist. (RSV)
8O'Neill, "How Early is the Doctrine of creatio ex nihilo?" 463.
9 F. Garda Martinez and E.J.C. Tigchelaar, eds., The Dead Sea Scrolls: Study Edition.
5 Irenaeus, Adversus Haereses [=Refutation and Overthrow ofKnowledgefalsely so-called] Volume One: 1Q1-4Q273 (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1997), 74-75.
3.10.3; cf. 2.10.4. See Gun ton, The Triune Creator, 52-56. 10 I. Barbour, Religion in an Age of Science (The Gifford Lectures 1989/1991, vol. 1; San

6 May, Creatio ex Nihilo, 27. Francisco: Harper & Row, 1990 ), 144.
6 DAVID TOSHIO TSUMURA THE DOCTRINE OF CREATION EX NIHILO 7

conflicts with Genesis creation stories, and that the texts often quoted in Testament writer struggles to contrast the creation, not with a background
support of the doctrine such as Rom 4:17, Heb 11:3, 2Macc 7:28 "can hardly of empty neutrality, but with an active chaos standing in opposition to the
be seen as clear evidence for creation ex nihilo, because they fit equally well will of God ... The chaos is a reality rejected by God." 14
with creation from initial chaos." 11 According to G. von Rad, "In Gen. I the Creation moves on from chaos to
So, the real issue now is whether the Genesis creation stories conflict cosmos by the driving back of the waters." 15
with the doctrine of creatio ex nihilo or not. We would like to deal with this B.W. Anderson, who has written several major works on creation and
problem by asking two specific questions: (1) Does Hebrew tehom "ocean" in chaos/ 6 asserts that "God created out of chaos (not ex nihilo), as shown by
Gen 1:2 represent chaos? (2) Does the phrase tohu wiibOhu in Gen. 1:2 refer the prefatory verse that portrays the earth as once being a chaotic waste:
to a chaotic state of the earth? Certainly, these questions are not the only stygian darkness, turbulent waters, utter disorder." 17
relevant ones with regard to the doctrine of creatio ex nihilo but scholars These theologians all base their interpretation of Gen 1:2 on H. Gunkel,
seem to rely on positive answers to these questions when they deny creatio who saw in Gen 1:2 a precreation condition of waterly chaos as in the Baby-
ex nihilo in the Genesis account. lonian creation myth Enuma elish. According to Gunkel, the biblical t"hom
is the mythological remnant from the chaotic sea goddess Tiamat against
whom the creator storm god Marduk had to battle before the creation of
B. Does tehom in Gen 1:2 Represent Chaos?
cosmos. 18
However, Gunkel's view, which has been so influencial among biblical
1. "OrderoutofChaos" scholars, is now under close scrutiny and needs to be drastically revised.
The standard Hebrew-English lexicon, HALOT, explains the term tehom While it is true that there is a linguistic relation between Hebrew t<hom and
"ocean" in Gen 1:2 as referring to the primaeval ocean as "one of the promi- Babylonian Tiamat, that is far from proving that the Babylonian myth was
nent elements in creation" with the additional comment "no creatio ex "transferred" to Israel and then "completely Judaized" in Gen 1, as Gunkel
nihilo." proposed. 19
Similarly, leading theologians, both dogmatic and biblical, deny that the
doctrine of creatio ex nihilo is found in the Genesis accounts and, instead,
assert that the creation was "out of chaos:; K. Barth treats this problem
under the topic of"das Nichtige," i.e. "Nothingness," in his Church Dogmat-
B.S. Childs, Myth and Reality in the Old Testament (London: SCM, 1960 ), 42.
14
ics, where he says: "In Gen. 1:2 ... there is a reference to the chaos which G. von Rad, Old Testament Theology. Vol. I: The Theology ofIsrael's Historical Traditions
15
the Creator has already rejected, negated, passed over and abandoned even (New York: Harper & Row, 1962 [orig. 1957) ), 148; see also 144.
before He utters His first creative Word ... Chaos is the unwilled and uncre- 16 B.W. Anderson, Creation versus Chaos: The Reinterpretation of Mythical Symbolism in

the Bible (Philadelphia: Fortress, 1987 [repr. of orig. 1967) ).

ated reality which constitutes as it were the periphery of His creation and 17 B.W. Anderson, "Mythopoetic and Theological Dimensions of Biblical Creation Faith,"
creature." 12 in B.W. Anderson (ed.), Creation in the Old Testament (Issues in Religion and Theology 6;
B.S. Childs, a pupil of Barth, explains Gen 1:2 as describing "the mystery Philadelphia: Fortress, 1984), 15. Also see his From Creation to New Creation: Old Testament
of a primordial threat against creation, uncreated without form and void, Perspectives. Philadelphia: Fortress, 1994.
18 H. Gunkel, Creation and Chaos in the Primeval Era and the Eschaton (Grand Rapids:
which God strove to overcome." 13 In another work, he holds that "the Old Eerdmans, 2006 [Ger. orig. 1895) ); idem, Genesis: Translated and Interpreted (3d ed.; Macon,
GA: Mercer Univ. Press, 1997 [orig. 1910 3 ; 1901) ).
19 Gunkel, Creation and Chaos, 82, summarizes the "Religio-historical sequence" as fol-

11 S.L. Bonting, "Chaos Theology: A New Approach to the Science-Theology Dialogue,"

lows:

Zygon 34 (1999): 324. His way of quoting Westermann's view is, however, inaccurate and 1. Marduk-myth ... 1. The Babylonian myth is transferred to Israel;
misleading. 2. Poetic recension of 2. There it loses many of its mythological elements and nearly all of
12 K. Barth, Church Dogmatics. Vol. III: The Doctrine of Creation, Part 3 (Edinburgh: T. &
the YHWH myth; ... its polytheistic elements;
T. Clark, 1960 ), 289-368 (§so), esp. 352; also Vol. II, 134-147.
13
B.S. Childs, Old Testament Theology in a Canonical Context (London: SCM, 1985), 223f. 3· Genesis 1 ... 3· In Genesis 1 it is, as far as it was possible, completely Judaized.
 8 DAVID TOSHIO TSUMURA THE DOCTRINE OF CREATION EX NIHILO 9

2. Reappraisal ofH Gunkel's Hypothesis In Mesopotamia as well as in Canaan, the term *tiham- had been used as
a common noun since before the time of composition of Enuma elish (c. znd
The intellectual situation has changed greatly since Gunkel's time, some
half of the znd millen. Be).
one hundred years ago. Enuma elish was not the only creation myth in
Mesopotamia, and we have now dozens of cosmological myths available 1. Old Akkadian: 3rd millen. BC
from the ancient Mesopotamia for comparison. S. Dalley says: Lagaski atima tiiimtim in'ar (SAG.GIS.RA)
kakki (gi 8TUKUL-gi)-su in tiiimtim imassl
We cannot speak of "the Mesopotamian view of creation" as a single, spe-
cific tradition, and this in turn shows the futility of claiming a direct con- "He vanquished Lagas as far as the sea.
nection between genesis as described in the Old Testament and any one He washed his weapons in the sea."
Mesopotamian account of creation. 20 2. Eblaite: 3rd millen. BC
I have worked on this topic in detail elsewhere; 21 hence I only summarize a-bar-d-is ti-'a-ma-d{m /'abaris tiham(a)tim/
my conclusions, mostly based on linguistic arguments. The followings are "beyond the sea"
the results: 3· Ugaritic: mid-znd millen. BC.

a. Hebrew tehOm could not have come from Akkadian Tiamat. ] gp . ym ".... the shore of the sea
ｷｹｾｧ､Ｎ＠ gp . thm And roams the shore of the ocean."
The consonants of the Hebrew word are t-h-m; those of the Akkadian
word are t-m-t (the second tis a feminine ending). Normally in linguistic In these texts, the terms tiiimtim (Akk.), tiham(a)tim (Ebla), and thm (Ug.)
change h drops, rather than being inserted. If the divine name Tiamat had are used for referring to a huge amount of water, i.e. "ocean." In Enuma
been borrowed and transformed to become a Hebrew term, the form would elish, the Akkadian term is personified and is used as the name of the ocean
have been something like te'omiih, not tehom. goddess Tiamat. However, while the term Tiamat refers to the salted "sea"
water in Enuma elish, its Canaanite cognates (Ug. thm and He b. tehOm[ ot])
b. Both tehom and Tiamat go back to the proto-Semitic term *tiham-, as we
refer to the subterranean water. In Northwest Semitic, the "sea" is normally
can see by the following words:
referred to by the term ym, not thm.
Akkadian tiiimtum or tamtum, Mari Akkadian Temtu
Arabic tihiimat d. The motif of conflict between storm and sea was originated in the Medi-
Eblaite ti-'a-ma-tum/tiham(a)tum/ terranean coast.
Ugaritic thm cf. ta-a-ma-tu4 /tahamatu/ (Ug V 137:III:34"): thmt This motif was not native to Mesopotamia, as T.Jacobsen 22 pointed out;
rather it originated along the Canaanite Mediterranean coast and moved
Thus, the Hebrew tehOm, like Ugaritic thm, is simply a term for "ocean"
or "many waters." Since the motif of a primaeval ocean is common in the eastward.
ancient Near East, it is no longer tenable to explain the similarity between e. The motif of a primordial ocean does not necessarily go with the conflict
tehOm and Tiamat as due to cultural borrowing. motif.
To cite one example from ancient Mesopotamia, in a bilingual version of
c. In Enuma elish, a common noun for "sea" was developed into a proper
the Creation ofthe World by Marduk, the initial state of the earth is described
name through personification and deification.
thus: "All the lands were sea." And then, without any motif of conflict, the
"creation" of the world is described. 23

20
S. Dalley, Myths from Mesopotamia: Creation, the Flood, Gilgamesh and Others: A New
Translation (World's Classics; Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1991), 278.
21
D.T. Tsumura, Creation and Destruction (Winona Lake, Ind.: Eisenbrauns, zoos), Chap- 22 T.Jacobsen, "The Battle between Marduk and Tiamat,"]AOS 88 (1968): 107.
ter 2 ('Waters in Genesis 1"). 23 See Tsum ura, Creation and Destruction, 71-72.
10 DAVID TOSHIO TSUMURA THE DOCTRINE OF CREATION EX NIHILO 11

3· Reappraisal ofj Day's Hypothesis Our conclusions are:

Since the motif of conflict between storm and sea seems to have originated 1. Only Enuma elish has both conflict and creation;
in Canaan,]. Day proposes a Canaanite background for the Genesis creation 2. Baal myths have only conflict without creation;
account, instead of a Mesopotamian one. 24 However, since in Canaan, as 3· Gen. 1 has only creation without conflict.
illustrated by the Ugaritic myths, the sea god is represented by Yam, not
R.A. Watson27 in her most recent study (zoos) deals thoroughly with the
Tehom, if Gen 1:2 had its origin in a Canaanite conflict myth, one would
poetic texts relating to the "chaos" motif, such as Pss 18, 24, 29, 68, 74, 77,
certainly expect yiim, not t'hom, to appear. In fact, the "seas" (yamm£m, pl.
8g, 114, etc. and some passages in Isaiah andJob. 28 She convincingly argues
ofyiim) appear for the first time in v. 10 in Gen 1.
that there is no intrinsic connection between "Chaoskampf" and creation
The motif of conflict between the storm-god and the sea-god has been
in the extant Israelite texts. She concludes that "the term 'chaos' should be
attested in various parts of the Ancient Near East. But, it is noteworthy
abandoned in respect of the Old Testament, since this literary collection
that the conflict motif and the creation motif usually do not coexist in
does not seem to possess a clear expression of the idea that Yahweh engaged
the myths and never in the Ugaritic mythology. For example, the passage
in combat with the sea or a sea monster in primordial times." 29
KTU1.2 [UT 68]:IV:4-30 describes the conflict of the storm god Baal with
the sea god Yam, but the conflict is described as one-to-one combat, not as a
meteorological phenomenon. Baal uses neither wind nor lightening to fight C. Does tohu wii.bohu Refer to a Chaotic State ofthe Earth?
with Yam; he simply uses two war clubs fashioned by Koshar-and-Hasis, the
god of art and wisdom. It has been shown that the term t'hOm in Gen 1:2 has nothing to do with
The most important thing to note, however, is that Baal had nothing to do the chaos motif. I should now like to clarifY the meaning of the phrase tohu
with creation, since he was not a creator god proper. In Ugaritic myths, it is wiibOhu in Gen. 1:2 and sort out various translations of the phrase in the early
the god El who created creatures, who has the title "creator of creatures," the history of biblical interpretation, especially during the Hellenistic period.
"father of mankind," etc. El is the one who begat the Good Gods of fertility as
well as Shahar-and-Shalim (KTU 1.23). On the other hand, Baal never created 1. Various Translations
anything, though he did repair the wings of eagles in the Aqhat epic. 25
In the English speaking world, some typical translations are:
In KTU 1.3 [UT 'nt] III 37-IV 3, Anat, the Baal's consort, refers to her
ancient combats with her, hence Baal's, enemies such as Yam. Again, there "void and empty" (Tyndale ); "without form, and void" (KJV); "waste and void"
is no creation motif in this coflict myth. (ASV); "without form and void" (RSV; NEB) or "formless and empty" (NN); "a
formless void" (NRSV) and "a vast waste" (REB). 30
Thus, in the Ugaritic mythology, the conflict myth between Baal and Yam
has nothing to do with creation. In fact, it should be noted, the Babylonian These translations can be classified into the following three categories:
creation myth Enuma elish is the only clear example in the ancient Near
[A]. "void and empty": ,___ inanis et vacua (Vulg.)
East of a myth which has motifs both of conflict and of creation. It is highly
speculative to treat the single myth Enuma elish as if it were the typical "vain within and void" (Wycliff 1388), "eitel und leere" (Koburger Bible 1483),
creation myth of the entire ancient Mesopotamia. 26 "void and empty" (Tyndale 1530)

27
R.A. Watson, Chaos Uncreated: A Reassessment of the Theme of"Chaos" in the Hebrew
Bible (BZAW 341; New York: Walter de Gruyter, zoos).
28
24
]. Day, God's Conflict with the Dragon and the Sea: Echoes ofa Canaanite Myth in the Old I too dealt with the Chaoskampf motif in some poetic texts of the Old Testament in the
Testament (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1985). Part 2 of Creation and Destruction,143-195·
29
25
Tsumura, Creation and Destruction, 53-57. Watson, Chaos Uncreated, 397·
30
26
See D.T. Tsumura, "The 'Chaoskampf Motif in Ugaritic and Hebrew Literatures," in Le As far as I know, the phrase tohu wiibohu has been translated as "chaos" in a standard
a
Royaume d'Ougarit de La Crete l'Euphrate: Nouveaux axes de Recherche ( ed. J.-M. Michaud; translation only in the Chinese Union version (118111!.) and the japanese Shin-Kyodo-yaku
Proche-Orient et ｌｩｴｾｲ｡ｵ･＠ Ougaritique z; Sherbrooke: GGC, 2007), 473-499. (118111!.).
12 DAVID TOSHIO TSUMURA THE DOCTRINE OF CREATION EX NIHILO 13

[B). "formless and empty'':<-- ci6pccro<; xed axcmxcnm)aaTO<;" "invisible and un- In sum, first of all God creates 'a kind of intellectual creature' and only then
formed" (LXX) the manifestly inferior material world. (12.9)
"without form and void" (KJV 16n); "without form and void" (RSV 1952, 19712 ; For the latter quotation, C.E. Gun ton detects "a real echo of the Timaeus"
NEB 1970; ESV 2001) or "formless and empty" (NIV 1978); "unformed and
void" UPS 1962, 1985), etc., "formless and void" (NASB 1971), "a formless void" in Augustine's remark. 35 He says: "Augustine continued to be marked by the
(NJB 1985, NRSV 1989) scars of the Manichaeism ... "36 In the English speaking world, this influence
of LXX persisted especially after KJV adopted the translation "without form
[C). "waste and empty''
and void" in 1611.
"wiist und leer" (Luther 1535, 1957-1984), "waste and void" (ASV 1901), "a vast In the later history of the Greek translations, or recensions, of the Old
waste" (REB 1989)
Testament during the 2nd century AD, Aquila and Theodotion made trans-
The group [B] is obviously influenced by LXX, as seen below. However, those lations closer to the Hebrew text than LXX is. Thus, Aquila's >c:EVWfLCX xcxl
translations in the group [A], which are pre-KJV, seem to have a different ou9€v "an emptiness (or "empty space") and a nothing" (AD 2nd Century)
translation tradition, probably that of the Vulgata, which is traceable back is a translation based on extreme literalism. A few decades later, we find
to the original Hebrew Bible. Theodotion's 9Ev xcxl ou9€v "a nothing and a nothing." On the other hand,
The LXX was translated in Alexandria during the Hellenistic period (2nd Symmachus made a fresh translation, emphasizing on the literary value
Century BC) under the deep influence of Greek philosophical thinking. It of Greek, and translating rather freely. Thus, (EYEVETO) apyov xcxl aota>c:ptTOV
translates tohu wiibohu as ｡Ｖｰ｣ｸｔｏｾ＠ >c:cxl ｣ｘｃｔｏｅｕｗｊｾ＠ "invisible and un- "(became) unworked and indistinguishable."37
formed". The second term, a hapaxlegomenon of LXX, which Liddell & Scott Jerome, who made the Vulgata with the help of a rabbi at Bethlehem,
explain as "unwrought, unformed," 31 also appears in 1Enoch 21:1-2, followed the tradition of Aquila and Theodotion, translating directly from
the Hebrew original. Group [A] among the English translations seems to
1) I traveled to where it was chaotic (11')<;" cixa-raaxEuaa-rou ). And there I saw a
have followed the Vulgata's translation "inanis et vacua." As for Group [C],
terrible thing; 2) I saw neither heaven above, nor firmly founded earth, but a
chaotic and terrible place. 32 they seem to stick to the original meaning of the Hebrew term tohu more
than any other group, as discussed below.
This LXX phrase was probably influenced, though indirectly, by such
phrases as "invisible and unshaped" (av6pcnov ... CtfLopcpov) of Plato's 2. Meanings and Usages oftohu
Timaeus, 50-51. 33
LXX's influence on Augustine can be been in the following expressions: In my 1989 monograph, 38 I classified the meanings of the term tohu into
three groups, by revising Westermann's classification39 as follows:
The earth was invisible and unorganized (terra autem invisibilis erat et
incomposita), and darkness was over the abyss. Formlessness is suggested by [1). "desert" (4 times)
these words, ... 34 (Confessions 12.22.) Deut 32:10,]ob 6a8,Job 12:24, Ps 107:40

31
This group of texts certainly describes tohu, which is synonymous with
H. G. Liddell, R. Scott, H.S.Jones, and R. McKenzie,A Greek-English Lexicon (9th ed. with
a revised supplement; Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1996), 48. midbiir "a desert land" (Deut 32:10 ), as a "wasteland" where caravans perish
32
G.W.E. Nickels burg and K. Baltzer, 1Enoch: A Commentary on the Book ofT Enoch (Her- Oob 6a8) and as a "trackless waste" where people wander (Job 12:24, Ps
meneia; Minneapolis: Fortress, 2001), on 21:1; also see R.H. Charles, Pseudepigrapha ofthe Old
Testament (Bellingham, WA: Logos Research Systems, 2004 [orig. 1913] ).
33 35
See R.G. Bury (Loeb Classical Library 234; Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University Press, See Gunton, The Triune Creator, 78.
36
1929 ), n9. On Plato's influence on the cosmological understanding ofPhilo, see D. Runia, Philo Gun ton, The Triune Creator, 79·
37
ofAlexandria and the 'Timaeus' ofPlato (Leiden: EJ. Brill, 1986), 524-527; cited by M. Endo, ].W. Wevers, Septuaginta: Genesis (Giittingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 1974), 75·
38
The johannie Prologue in the Light ofEarly jewish Creation Accounts (ca. 2nd. Century BCE to D.T. Tsumura, The Earth and the Waters in Genesis 1and2 (JSOTSS 83; Sheffield: Sheffield
1st Century CE) (Ph.D. diss., St. Andrews University, 2000 ). Academic Press, 1989), 30-41.
34 39
See A. Louth, ed., Genesis 1-11 (Ancient Christian Commentary on Scripture, Old Testa- C. Westermann, Genesis 1-11: A Commentary (Minneapolis: Augsburg, 1984 [orig. 1974 ]),
ment 1; Downers Grove, II.: InterVarsity Press, 2001), 4· 102-103.
14 DAVID TOSHIO TSUMURA THE DOCTRINE OF CREATION EX NIHILO 15

107:40 ). Thus, the term refers to an actual desert as "a waste land," which w'el-hassiimayim and to the heavens, 45
Westermann explains as "the grim desert waste that brings destruction." w'en '8riim and they had no light.
This meaning is supported by Ugaritic thw "desert" or "wasteland,"40 and the
term goes back to the Common Semitic *tuhw-.
[2). "desert-like state" (7 times)
z7)ki-k6h 'iimar YHWH For thus says the Lord:
In all of the passages belonging to this group (according to Westermann s'miimiih tihyeh The whole land shall be a desolation;
including Gen 1:2 ), the term tohu is used for describing the situation or ｫｯｬＭｨｩＧｲ･ｾ＠

condition of places such as earth, land or city. Westermann explains tohu in wkiiliih l6' 'e'eseh yet I will not make a full end.
28 l'al-z6't te'ebal ｨｩＧｲ･ｾ＠
Because of this the earth shall mourn,
Isa 24:10,34:11, 40:23,]er 4:23 as "a desert or devastation that is threatened," wqiid'rn hassiimiiyim and the heavens above grow black;
while that in Gen 1:2, Isa 45:18 and job 26:7 as "the state which is opposed mimmii'al
to and precedes creation." His explanation for the latter group is deeply 'al ki-dibbarti zamm6ti for I have spoken, I have purposed;
influenced by his "chaos" theory. I will provide here my own translations w'l6' nif:tamti I have not relented
of the passages (except Gen 1:2 ), which I discussed in detail elsewhere. 41 wl6'-'iisub mimmenniih nor will I tum back. (NRSV)
1. Isa24:10 6. /sa34:11

nisb'riih qiryat-t6hu The city is broken down into desolation, 42 wniitiih 'iilehii qaw-t6hu And He shall stretch over it the line of
suggar kol-bayit mibb6' every house is shut up so none can enter. desolation
w'abne-b6hu And the plumb line of emptiness. (NASB)
2.]ob26:7
n6teh ｾｩｰＸｮ＠ 'a[- t'6hU He stretches out the high mountains over an [3). "emptiness" (8 times)
empty place, 1Sam 12:21, Isa 29:21, Isa 40:17, Isa 40:23, 46 Isa 41:29, Isa 44:9, Isa 49:4, 47 Isa 59:4
t6leh Ｇ･ｲｾ＠ 'al-b'li-miih He suspends the earth over a place where
there is nothing. In this group, the term tohu refers to a situation which lacks something
3.lsa45:18 abstract that should be there, such as worth, purpose, truth, profit and
l6'-t6hU b'rii'iih He created it not to be a desert-like place; integrity. Thus, it is better understood as referring to "a lack" or "emptiness"
liisebet ｹｾｩｲｨ＠ he formed it to be inhabited. rather than as "nothingness." This abstract use of tohu seems to be typical
oflsaiah and the only other usage in this sense is 1Sam 12:21, which refers to
4· /sa 45:19 43
idols in a fashion similar to Isa 44:9. Significantly, the term tohu in this sense
[6' basseter dibbarti I did not speak in secret, is never used with nouns such as "earth" ('ere$) and "city" ('£r).
bimq8m Ｇ･ｲｾ＠ f:tOsek in a land of darkness,
Having re-classified the meanings and usages of the Hebrew term tohu in
[6' 'iimarti ['zera'ya'iiq6b I did not say to Jacob's descendants
t6hu baqq'suni (in a land of) desolation, 44 'Seek me!' the Old Testament except in Gen 1:2, it is interesting to note how this term
is translated in the LXX, as well as in Aramaic Targumim, in the relevant
s.Jer4:23
passages.
23 lrii'iti Ｇ･ｴＭｨｩｲｾ＠ I looked on the earth,
w<hinneh- t6hu wiibohU and lo, it was waste and void;

40 D. Pardee, "The Ba'alu Myth," in The ContextofScripture, Vol. I (ed. W.W. Hallo; Leiden:
45
For this parallel structure (a-b-x I I B'-x') with a "vertical grammar," see D.T. Tsumura,
Brill, 1997 ), 265. "Vertical Grammar: The Grammar of Parallelism in Biblical Hebrew" in Hamlet on a Hill:
41
See Tsumura, Creation and Destruction, 24-32. Semitic and Greek Studies Presented to Professor T. Muraoka on the Occasion of his Sixty-
42
Here, the term tohu is taken to be an objective genitive (for result) of the construct Fifth Birthday (ed. M.F.J. Baasten and W.Th. van Peursen; Leuven: Peeters, 2003), 487-497;
chain qiryat-tohu, which has been translated "the city of desolation" or the like. "Vertical Grammar of Parallelism in Hebrew Poetry,"]BL 128 (2009): 167-181.
46
43 Westermann classified it as [3], but it clearly should be classified as [2]. Westermann classified it as [2], but it clearly should be with 40:17.
47
4 4 Or "(in) a desolate place."
Not in Westermann's English translation, but in the German original.
16 DAVID TOSHIO TSUMURA THE DOCTRINE OF CREATION EX NIHILO 17

3· LXX Translation of tohu Job 6:18 (they go up) Llm' "to nothing" (and perish)
job12:24 blm' dlyt 'wrl;' "in nothing where is no path"
tohU wabohu
Ps1o7:4o blm' (dl' 'wrf;_') "in nothing (without path)"
Gen 1:2 ｬｩＶｰ｣ｮｯｾ＠ (invisible) ｸ｣ｴｬｩｦＧｲｮｭＩｯｾ＠ (unformed)
(2) Isa 24:10 $dy't "be a desert"
Jeq:23 ou6Ev (= tohu wabohu)
Isa 45:18 lryqnw "for naught" ... l'sg'h "to increase (on it)"
Isa 34:11 xcxi ｅｔｃｬｾａｙｊＶＱｘ＠ ETC' cxuTI)v O"TCCXpTtOV ｙｅｗｊＡｔｰｴ｣ｸｾ＠ ｅｰｾｊＡｏｕ＠
Isa 45:19 qbl "darkness" ... lryqnw "for naught"
(desert+-- tohu) xcxi OVOXEVTcxupot ｯｬｸｾｏＢｕｖ＠ EV cxu-rfl
Job26:7 'llmh "on nothing" ... 'lwy my' mdlyt md'm "upon water from
tohU which nothing supports"
(1) Deut CXUTcXPXYJO"EV cxuTov Ev YiJ ｅｰｾｊｬＧ＠ (land of wilderness) Ev 6hjJEt (3) 1Sam a
lm' "nothingness" ... lm' 0)
32:10 (thirst) ｸ｣ｕｊＡｃｘｔｏｾ＠ (of heat) Ev livu6pcp (desert) 12:21
Isa 29:21 sqr "lie"
Job 6a8 6E xcxi ｅｾｯｴｸ＠ (houseless) EYEVOJ!YJV
lm' "nothingness" ... gmyr' "destruction"
Job 12:24 6tCXMcX1111WV ｸ｣ｰＶＨｾ＠ cipxovTWV ﾥＱｾ＠ ETCAaVYJO"EV 6E ｃｘｕｔｏｾ＠ MciJ n Isa 40:17
Isa4o:23 f:zwlS' "faintness, weariness" ... lm' "nothingness"
oux fj6Et11CXV ([the road] which they didn't know)
Isa 41:29 lm' "nothingness" ... l' md'm "no something" ... tbr' "fracture,
Ps 107:40 xcxi ETCAcXVYJO"EV ｣ｸｵｔｯｾ＠ Ev ｣ｩｾｔｰ＠ (waste land, desert) xcxi oux
gap"
664J
Isa44:9 lm' "nothingness" ... l'yhnwn "do not profit"
(2) Isa 24:10 ｾｐｙｊＡｗＶ＠ (became desolate) TCCXO"CX ｔｃｏａｴｾ＠ XAEtO"El oix(cxv Toil ｊｬｾ＠ Isa49:4 lryqnw "for naught" ... llm' "for nothingness"
ELI1EA6EtV Isa59:4 lm' "nothingness" ... sqr "lie"
Isa 45:18 oux ｅｩｾ＠ xEvov (empty) ... cit.Aii xcxTotxd0"6cxt (to be inhabited)
Isa 45:19 JlcXTCXlOV (vain, nothing) ｾｬＧｊｏＢｃｘｔｅ＠ In these lists, we can observe that the Hebrew term tohu is more or less
Job 26:7 ETC' ou6Ev (nothing) ... ETCi ｯｍｅｶＶｾ＠ (nothing)
consistently translated into Greek and Aramaic when the word has the
(3) 1Sam xcxi ｊｬｾ＠ ｔｃｘｰ｣ｸｾｅ＠ OTCtO"W TWV J!YJ6Ev OVTWV Ol ou TCEpcxvoilO"lV ou6Ev meaning of the first [1] ("desert") and the third [3) ("emptiness") groups.
12:21 xcxl o'i oux ｅｾａｏｕｖｔｃｘｬ＠ OTl ou6Ev ELO"lV As for the second group [2 ), the majority of translations in both languages
Isa 29:21 xcxl ETCAcxy(cxacxv Ev ｣ｩＶＨｸｯｴｾ＠ 6(xcxtov
Isa 40:17 ｷｾ＠ ou6Ev ... xcxl ｅｴｾ＠ ou6Ev (nothing) EA.oyti16YJO"CXV
seem to convey the "desert-like situation" of a concrete location, as we have
Isa 40:23 6 Ｖｴｯｵｾ＠ Ｆｰｸｯｶｔｃｘｾ＠ ｅｩｾ＠ ou6Ev &pxm TI)v 6E yijv ｷｾ＠ ou6Ev ETCOlYJI1EV observed in the Hebrew texts.
Isa 41:29 xcxl JlcXTYJV (in vain) oi ｔｃａ｣ｸｶｷｅｾ＠ ｕｊＡｩｬｾ＠ As for Isa. 34:11, where the term tohu appears in parallel with the term
Isa44:9 Ot ｔｃａ｣ｘｏＢｖｅｾ＠ XCXt ｙａｕＨｊｏｖｔｅｾ＠ ｔｃ｣ｘｖｅｾ＠ JlcXTCXlOl (vain, nothing) Ot bohU, tohU is interpreted as belonging to the second group ("desert-like
ｔｃｏｬｕｖｅｾ＠ TCt XCXTCX6UJllCX CXUTWV & oux ｗＨｊｅａｾｏＢｬ＠ ｃｘｕｔｏｾ＠ CtMCt state"), as LXX's translation ｅｰｾｦａｏｕ＠ ("desert") and TargumJonathan's 1}-rbn'
ｃｘｌｏＩＨｕｖＶｾＱＰｔｬ＠
"desolation" show.
Isa49:4 ｅｩｾ＠ JlcXTCXlOV (vain) xcxl ｅｌｾ＠ ou6EV (nothing)
Isa 59:4 ETCi ｊｬｃｘｔｏｾ＠
s. tohu wabohu in LXX and Aramaic Targumim
4. Aramaic Translation of tohu Now, we come to the point where we compare LXX and Targumim to note
tohU wabohu the difference in translating the phrase tohu wabohu in Gen 1:2 andJer 4:23.
Gen 1:2 $dy'wrwqny"'desolate and empty" (Onqelos)
Gen1:2 ｬｩＶｰ｣ｸｔｯｾ＠ (invisible) xcxi ｬｩｸ｣ｔｃｘｏＢｅｕｾ＠ (unformed)
thy'wbhy' (Neofiti)
Gen1:2 $dy' wrwqny' "desolate and empty" (Onq); thy'wbhy' (Neofiti);
thyy'wbhy' (Pseudo Jonathan)
thyy'wbhy' (PsJo)
Jer 4:23 $dy'wrwqny"'desolate and empty" aonathan)
Isa 34:11 /:zrbn' "destruction" onathan) a Jer 4:23 ou6Ev (= tohu wabohU)
tohU
Jer 4:23 $dy' wrwqny' "desolate and empty" 0) a
(1) Deut byt $hwn' "the house of thirst" ( Onq) Targumim are consistent in interpreting the phrase tohu wabohu in both
32:10
passages as having the sense of "desolation;" thus they either translate $dy'
wb$llth "in the noise" (wb$dywth) (Neofiti)
h$dyywt (Psjo)
 18 DAVID TOSHIO TSUMURA
ﾷ［ｾ＠

THE DOCTRINE OF CREATION EX NIHILO 19

wrwqny' ("desolate and empty") as in Targ Onq and Targ Jo, or leave the D. Interpretation of tohu wabohu in Its Genesis Context
Hebrew phrase untranslated (thy' wbhy' or thyy' wbhy') as in Targ Ne and
Targ PsJo.
1. The Earth-Waters Relationship in Gen 1
On the other hand, LXX translates the phrase quite differently in two
passages. In Jer 4:23, tohu wiibohu is translated by one word ou9£v "noth- It is crucial for the correct interpretation of Gen 1:1-2 to understand the
ing," which is used as a translation for the term tohu in 1Sam 12:21 and Isa earth-waters relationship properly. As discussed elsewhere, 5° the author of
40:17, where the meaning ("emptiness") of the group [3] was applied in Genesis expresses the entire universe in terms of a merismatic pair, "the
the Hebrew text. Thus, LXX Gen 1:2 is the sole example which translates heavens and the earth" (v. 1). In other words, he explains the cosmos by a
the phrase as a6pc:rro<; (invisible) xed CtX<XT<XCTXEU<XCTTO<;" (unformed), in a com- bi-partite expression (as in Ps 148, Prov 3:1g), not a tri-partite one.
pletely different way from the other cases. Such a translation must have The Bible often use a tri-partite expression to describe the total universe;
been made possible because the translator was influenced by Greek cos- for example, "heaven-earth-sea" (Exod 20:11, Ps 146:6, Hag 2:6, etc). How-
mology represented by Plato's Timaeus. ever, in such cases, the "sea" is described by the Hebrew term yam (or plural
There appears to be one serious problem when we compare LXX and yammim), not t<h6m. Hence, there is no place in Gen 1:2 for the interpreta-
Targumim, that is the chronology. Though the Jewish tradition ascribes the tion that God created only "heaven and earth," but not "sea," for the author
first Targum to Ezra, it is not clear when the first Targumim were produced. uses the phrase "heaven and earth" merismatically for the entire universe.
However, taking into consideration that some Targ. fragments were found Moreover, Gen 1:2 uses t'hom, which refers to water normally under the
in Qumran (4QtgLev, 4QtgJob, nQtgJob), it would not be unreasonable to earth; hence semantically the term t'hom is hyponymous to the term 'ere$. In
hold that the origin of Targum such as Targum Onqelos possibly goes back other words, the thing which the term t'h8m refers to is included in the thing
in the oral formulation even to the Hellenistic era. 48 which the term 'ere$ "the earth" refers to. Hence, the author assumes that the
If this is the case, it may be reasonable to assume that there were two t'hOm-water was also created by God. Thus, the two terms are hyponymous
basic streams of traditions in the Bible translation in the Hellenistic period, to each other. But, the earth-water relation described in v. 2 is somewhat
i.e. one is the Greek tradition which started with LXX at Alexandria, the unusual, for the underground water is then flooding all over the earth, which
other, the Aramaic tradition in Palestine. These two streams of traditions will only come out on the third day of God's creation. Such an earth, though
still remain influential as recognizable in the two English translations of called "earth," is "desolate and empty," and not yet a normal earth as it is
Hebrew tohu wiibOhu, as "formless and empty" or "waste and empty." The without plants, animals or human beings on it.
former was accepted by Augustine and Calvin, while the latter is repre- Now, in v. 2, the focus of the narrator shifts from the entire universe
sented by Luther's "wiiste." Two new English translations published in 1989 ("heavens and earth") to the earth, setting aside the heaven. Discourse
are also divided into these two traditions: "a formless void" (NRSV; but structurally, here is where the shifting of focus, or the narrowing down of
"waste and void" for Jer 4:23) and "a vast waste" (REB). the scope occurs. So, v. 2 says: "As for the earth, it was desolate and empty,"
Knowing that the translation "formless" is a Greek idea and not based on i.e. "unproductive and uninhabited."
the original Hebrew meaning, the most natural sense of tohu as a Semitic The reason why the author explains the earth in terms of tohu wiibohu,
term, i.e. "waste" or "desolate" should be respected and adopted. It should however, is not to describe positively how the earth was at that moment;
be noted in particular that xao<; does not appear as a translation of tohu in rather, tohu wiibohu is a negative, but not destructive, expression. That
the Hellenistic period. 49 means, the phrase reminds the audience, who lives on an earth, already
inhabited with plants and animals, of the situation of the earth as "not yet"
the normal one they know by experience. The narrator thus prepares the

48
E. Tov, Textual Criticism ofthe Hebrew Bible (Minneapolis: Fortress, 1992),149-150.
49
The term ｸＦｯｾ＠ appears twice (Mic 1:6, Zech 14:4) in the LXX translation of Old Testa- 50
Tsumura, The Earth and the Waters in Genesis 1 and 2, 72-77, which is revised in
ment with the meaning "gaping abyss, chasm," corresponding to Ｂｶ｡ｬ･ｹＨＧｾＮ＠ N'a.). Chapter 3 of Creation and Destruction (zoos). 63-69.
20 DAVID TOSHIO TSUMURA THE DOCTRINE OF CREATION EX NIHILO 21

audience for the subsequent announcement that it was by God's fiat that was intended and established. The same is true, for example, in the case of
the current earth became productive and inhabited. contemporary interpretations of the theological term "Trinity." Therefore,
Hence, the "breath" (or "spirit") of God was preparing (i.e. "hovering") when translating tohu wiibohu into a modem language (English, Japanese,
to utter the first word, "Let there be light!" This interpretation seems to be Chinese, etc), one should be extra careful not to introduce non-biblical ideas
supported by Heb 11:3, which says: "the universe was created by the word of such as "chaos."
God," not by God's "logos" ＨａＮＶｹｯｾＩ＠ but by God's utterance ＨｐｾＡｬ｣ｮ＠ 9e:oD), as in
Gen 1:3 ff. The other term "darkness" simply denotes the situation that there
was no light yet, rather than a situation where something called "darkness"
existed at the beginning.

2. Discourse Structure ofGen 1:1-3

Such understanding is well supported by the Hebrew discouse structure in

the first verses in Gen. 1.

v.1-Summary statement
v.z-SETTING
V.3-EVENT

V. 1 is simply a summary statement that God created everything in the

beginning. V. 2 is not explaining what happened at that moment; rather, it
provides the background information (SETTING) for the first EVENT, which
begins in v. 3 where the narrative "tense" wayqtl (waw consecutive+ impf.)
appears for the first time in this narrative. V. 2 describes the stage setting
where neither dramati persona was on the stage yet nor any action began
yet. Hence, the first act of God's creation occurs in v. 3 and the first creature
was "light," not "water," even though t;ehom is mentioned in v. z.

E. Concluding Remarks: Relationship between Doctrine and the Bible

Thus, before establishing any doctrine, we need to do exegesis, not eisgesis,

of any particular text in its immediate context, then in the context of the
entire Bible. In the Hellenistic time, the Jews in Alexandria read Greek philo-
sophical thinking into the Hebrew text, while in the modem era, Gunkel and
his followers have read the Babylonian chaos myth into Gen 1:2. Now, in the
21st century, we make the same mistake in the Biblical interpretation when
we read the modem "chaos theory" into the Genesis creation accounts as
process theologians do.
We can say that even the doctrine of creatio ex nihilo can be dangerous,
if we simply pursue the abstract meaning of the term nihilo ("nothing")
itself without seeking the concrete historical setting in which the doctrine