It quickly becomes clear to anyone who has consulted more than a few commentaries on this chapter of Genesis that the meaning of tohu wabohu is crucial to the translation and, more importantly, the meaning of v2 and its relationship to v1. In most English translations the expression—consisting of two nouns linked together—is almost always translated by variations of the two adjectives "formless and void." This, in a very significant sense, says very little about what it actually means. Commentators have often turned to the noun "chaos" to define what it is. In recent decades another expression has been introduced to define it, "pre-existing chaos."1 Of this expression, we make two remarks:
1) the expression 'pre-existing chaos' is a contradiction in plain terms; its very pre-existence (= non-existence?) leaves us with nothing to say about it nor can it be referred to anything that is meaningful.
2) it misses the point that, if there can be or was such a thing, it cannot refer to tohu wabohu in v2 since the latter assumes an already existing Earth. Tohu wabohu was the state of the Earth at this point in its story. Tohu wabohu, therefore, belongs to the story of an already on-going process of creation when the earth already was, not to its prequel.
Of this "pre-existent chaos," therefore we will say no more in the rest of this exploration.
The noun tohu appears on its own 18x, while bohu occurs only three times: twice in the expression tohu wabohu (Gen 1:2 & Jer 4:23) and once more in close parallel to tohu (Isa 34:11; Open Relevant Texts). Using the NIV as our base, we note the following meanings tohu expresses.
A.
'waste' = 'wasteland' - 4×, Deut 32:10, Job 6:18, 12:24, Psm 107:40;
'desolate' - 1×, Isa 24:10;
'chaos' - 1×, Isa 34:11 (where it is paralleled with bohu);
These six references point to places of ruin. They are physical locations—even with some real physical structures—that are unsuitable and, therefore, worthless, as real estates for safe and productive residence. We may picture here, perhaps, Carthage and Corinth after they had been sacked and ravaged by the Romans in 146 BC. Or Dresden after it had been fire-bombed by the Allies during WWII, or Hiroshima and Nagasaki after it had been atomized by the Americans. These places were not formless or void but no one would think them places to move one's family to live in. If they are "formless and void" it is only in the metaphorical sense; i.e., they are worthless as they are. The formlessness and void, if we still insist on using such terms, is neither physical nor material but existential, psychological, emotional (see photo of what Verdun became during WWI below).
Tohu wabohu?
It should also be noted here that the noun 'chaos,' used so frequently to depict tohu wabohu in Gen 1:1, is used only once as a translation for tohu. It is clear from the context of the passage (Isa 34:11) that a better translation is 'desolation.' Owls—and so many of them—are more likely to fill-in in a 'desolation' rather than a 'chaos.' Chaos suggests confusion, but as archaeologists and ecologists will be thankful to tell us, there is sense and order in the desolation of ruins. This suggests also that the use of the noun 'chaos' in the context of Gen 1 is, at best confounding, if not confusing.
B.
'empty' - 1×, Isa 45:18
'empty space' - 1×, Job 26:7;
'Empty' makes sense in Isa 45:18 (probably one of NIV's better choice of word over the other English translations) but it is empty only in contrast to being "inhabited." Job 26:7 is so far the only clear reference to tobu being understood as a void.
C.
'useless idol' - 1×, 1 Sam 12:21;
'useless' - 1×, 1 Sam 12:21;
'worthless' = 'nothing' - 3×, Isa 40:17, v23, 44:9,
'vain' - 2×, Isa 45:19, 49:4.
Of these the only notable remark that needs to be made is that of NIV's rendition, which is more of an interpretation rather than a translation. The specific referent in the text is unclear; while "useless idol" is a not an unjustified translation, most versions are more judicious, with "useless things" (NRS), "empty things" (NKJ, ESV), "futile things" (NASB), or "vain things" (KJV, RSV). But it is easy to see, from the use of tobu in the examples from A & B above, how "tohu" could also embrace the meanings of uselessness and worthlessness as exemplified in these verses. These things do not belong to those who wish to live well and secure.
D.
'false(hood)' - 3×, Isa 29:21, 41:29, 59:4;
While the sense of falsehood is clearly evident in each of these usages, all of more clearly reflect the use of empty, meaningless words in the cause of injustice. They, therefore, do not belong to the realm where men may dwell in security and assurance.
Taken together then, we notice that the clearest feature of tohu is neither its formlessness (whether physical or material) nor its emptiness, and certainly not its chaos (disarray or confusion). Its emptiness is that of the ruins and desert, i.e., its lack of true significance for those who wish to live secure and live well. Its formlessness, if one still insists on this word, is the shapelessness of perplexity arising from the lack of differentiation or clear taxonomy with which one may discern and make sense of things.
This noun bohu appears, as we have said, only once independent of tohu, at Isa 34:11, where its meaning ('desolation,' NIV; 'emptiness' in most versions) is guessed at from the context, and is quite nearly synonymous with tohu.
This leaves us now to decide what is the signification of the noun-pair tobu wabolu. It has often been noted by commentators that the exact meaning of tohu wabohu is difficult to grasp. The reason is not difficult to understand. Occurring only twice in the OT, and with almost no differentiation in their meanings, we are left with little but to turn to the larger context of the works in which they appear to make sense of the noun-pair. Nonetheless it is possible, from this, to make some incontrovertible observations.
1) Whatever its precise meaning, it is clear that the assonance of the word-pair hightens its effect on the audience. Not incontrovertible but food for though is this. In addition to English, I speak two other languages, Chinese (mainly in the Cantonese dialect) and Malay. In both of them there are examples of noun-pair in which one of the nouns does not appear to have any meaning on its own. Let me give a couple of examples from the Malay language (it is alphabethic, Chinese is not). The Malay word for a dessert, a piece of cake, a curry-puff, a pudding, e.g., is kuih, esp., if there is only one kind of them. When we have a spread with a large assortment of them, however, we would say kuih-muih. The word muih has no independent existence of its own, but coupled to kuih which does, it expands the latter's semantic colour and texture entirely, loading it with implications of varieties, vividness, and abundance; it then titillates our senses, heightens our expectations and caresses our desire. Lauk, similarly is an independent word meaning gravy or sauce. Hitching it with mauk, (which has no meaning on its own) as in "lauk-mauk," makes us looking forward to dinner and turns our gastric juices full on. Might bohu be doing the same thing—though in a negative direction—with tohu?
2) Almost all the discussion about tohu wabohu looks in the direction of cosmogony for its meaning. Given the philosophical bend of the Western mind, perhaps this is inevitable. Gen 1 in particular, and the OT in general, do not seem quite so inclined. As we have seen in our survey of the usage of tohu above, the noun most frequently points to situations that do not support a life of security and wellness; desolations, wasteland, empty-spaces with little of significance. This sense—heightened by its pairing with bohu—comports very well with the thrust of Gen 1. The movement of the story is from such a tohu wabohu—a place yet totally unsuitable for human habitation—dark (therefore, impossible to discern anything) and wet (dank and soggy)—to a place transformed by the wealth of divine provisions and affirmed by the Master who does things well as "very good." I suggest that, instead of stagnating in our well-worn habit of assuming a cosmogonic bend to understanding of tohu wabohu, we stake our sight on this salvation-historical perspective instead. It would be ideal if we could come up with an expression that will replace "without form and void," so that we may be rehabilitated into the alternative perspective but that would be wishing too much, I think.
Low Chai Hok
Further Reading:
F.F. Bruce, "'And the Earth was without form and void' - An Enquiry into the Exact Meaning of Genesis 1, 2," Journal of the Transactions of the Victoria Institute 78 (1946): 21-24.
Pdf N 6-7
©Alberith, 2020