Genesis 1:2

[IndigoChild5559]

And the spirit of Hashem hovered over the face of the waters.

I have a Christian friend in real life that I am close to and sometimes in good spirits we discuss our differences in religion. He has made the claim that this verse is Messianic. He refers to a Jewish midrash, B're****h Rabba 1:2, which states "“The Spirit of the Lord will rest on him." To me it is obvious that the midrash is simply making the analogy that the spirit of God will rest upon the Messiah the same way it hovered over the waters and that is what I've said so far. In no way is it saying that the Messiah is that spirit. I wish I had access to B're****h Rabba so that I could get the full context. Anyhow, comments? How do you all think I should best continue to respond?

 

[rosends]

Here is the text. The medrash presents a series of analogical references. The t'hom is 1 exile and the bohu is another exile. The medrashic interpretation of the verse is that the various elements point to future events and concepts. The ru'ach is a reference to the spirit which will rest on the moshiach after proper teshuva.

https://www.sefaria.org/Isaiah.11.2?lang=bi&p2=Berei****_Rabbah.2.4&lang2=bi

 

[leov]

And the spirit of Hashem hovered over the face of the waters.

I have a Christian friend in real life that I am close to and sometimes in good spirits we discuss our differences in religion. He has made the claim that this verse is Messianic. He refers to a Jewish midrash, B're****h Rabba 1:2, which states "“The Spirit of the Lord will rest on him." To me it is obvious that the midrash is simply making the analogy that the spirit of God will rest upon the Messiah the same way it hovered over the waters and that is what I've said so far. In no way is it saying that the Messiah is that spirit. I wish I had access to B're****h Rabba so that I could get the full context. Anyhow, comments? How do you all think I should best continue to respond?

Why not Num 11:17 for example?

 

[LightofTruth]

And the spirit of Hashem hovered over the face of the waters.

I have a Christian friend in real life that I am close to and sometimes in good spirits we discuss our differences in religion. He has made the claim that this verse is Messianic. He refers to a Jewish midrash, B're****h Rabba 1:2, which states "“The Spirit of the Lord will rest on him." To me it is obvious that the midrash is simply making the analogy that the spirit of God will rest upon the Messiah the same way it hovered over the waters and that is what I've said so far. In no way is it saying that the Messiah is that spirit. I wish I had access to B're****h Rabba so that I could get the full context. Anyhow, comments? How do you all think I should best continue to respond?

It's important to understand the analogy of wings with the spirit of God. it helps greatly in the interpretation of Scripture.

 

[Flankerl]

It also helps greatly to respect the Judaism DIR.

 

[Brickjectivity]

***mod: This section is for conversation between Jewish religion members only. Others may create threads elsewhere. Area is marked 'Judaism Dir' Thanks! ***

 

[Tumah]

As @rosends already explained what the Midrash says, I'll explain what Midrash does ... or what it doesn't do. What it doesn't do, is provide the meaning of the verse. The meaning of the verse is expressed through pshat and relies on context. This is a verse about the creation of the world. There are different types of Midrash, but the Midrashic interpretation used here is when the literal meaning of the verse is put aside and the elements of the verse are understood as allusions to other things that follow a similar pattern.

@rosends explained how the quoted Midrash plots the four exiles and subsequent redemption according to the four negative elements and single positive element of verse 1:2. That's the Midrashic interpretation of Reish Lakish.
Rabbi Shimon ben Pazi also has a Midrashic interpretation of this verse where the four negative elements (one of which extends to two parts of the verse) represents the five major generations of sinners until Abraham and the positive element represents G-d's Mercy for Noah.

So you see that they're not really explaining the verse as much as expressing how later events are rooted in the acts of Creation (per Isa.46:10).

 

[IndigoChild5559]

Why not Num 11:17 for example?

Thank you. This is good.

 

[Jake1001]

And the spirit of Hashem hovered over the face of the waters.

I have a Christian friend in real life that I am close to and sometimes in good spirits we discuss our differences in religion. He has made the claim that this verse is Messianic. He refers to a Jewish midrash, B're****h Rabba 1:2, which states "“The Spirit of the Lord will rest on him." To me it is obvious that the midrash is simply making the analogy that the spirit of God will rest upon the Messiah the same way it hovered over the waters and that is what I've said so far. In no way is it saying that the Messiah is that spirit. I wish I had access to B're****h Rabba so that I could get the full context. Anyhow, comments? How do you all think I should best continue to respond?

First, no “o” in G-d. Too early for M-ssiah stuff !

 

[Jayhawker Soule]

In my opinion, the text is the text and challenging enough while allusion is in the eye of the beholder.

 

[LAGoff]

Per Christine Hayes' YouTube lecture series on the Hebrew Scriptures and John H. Walton ('ANE Thought and the OT'), I'd mention the ANE (Ancient Near Eastern) way of thinking from which this comes out of.
In light of these teachers, I see this 'ruach' ('spirit'/'wind') as the 'spirit' of order that forms the pre-existing [chaotic] state.
The next verse really seals this spirit of order for me as 'light' is the first thing that is spoken into existence. Since actual [material] light doesn't appear till the 4th day, I see this light of v.3 as MEANING itself, which for me is the 'crown' of order. A creation without meaning is the definition of chaos.
Your friend can bring in at this point the prologue to John and The Logos which serves a similar role for Christians.
Fine. All I'm saying is that one doesn't have to look beyond the old MEANING.
Along these lines, I see Isaiah 40-55 (the 'Servant Songs') as a reminder to the sleeping/blind 'servant' (Israel) NOT to get something 'New', but to realize what is already there.

 

[Jayhawker Soule]

First, no “o” in G-d. Too early for M-ssiah stuff !

See Why do some Jews write "G-d" instead of "God"? ​

And now, back to Gen 1:2 ...