Replies

I see nothing in your reply that in any way weakens my case. If asah and bara are referrential synonyms, they in no way hinder a straightforward reading of creation week. Likewise, if asah and bara can be used as standard synonyms, they in no way hinder a straightforward reading of creation week. No matter which way you slice it, a straightforward reading of creation week is what is called for.

Also, you brought an the example of Isaiah 41:20. If you back up one verse, you will notice that the “bara” in vs. 20 is used in reference to the vegetation mentioned in vs. 19. But as we see in Genesis 1:11, God did not create vegetation from nothing, but rather He caused it to sprout from the earth. So why would God point to an asah event as evidence of bara?

You just hide your pain well. But I do wonder about this seeming fixation on the phrase,
“ a straightforward reading of creation week”. I mean three times in six lines? You'll have to tell me if straightforward is the same as literal, honest, lacking deviousness, what?
Actually, you brought Isa. 41:20 up, but thats o.k., as the chapter shows it was the condition or situation of the nation of Israel that was being created not the plants of vss. 18, 19.

“But as we see in Genesis 1:11, God did not create vegetation from nothing, but rather He caused it to sprout from the earth. So why would God point to an asah event as evidence of bara?”

Gen. 1:11 uses the Hebrew word ‘dasha’, spring forth, etc.
while uss vs. 12 uses the word, yatsa’, more the thing actually taking place.
But neither is ‘asah.