Skip to Content.
Sympa Menu

b-hebrew - Re: Genesis 1 & 2

b-hebrew AT lists.ibiblio.org

Subject: Biblical Hebrew Forum

List archive

Chronological Thread  
  • From: "Dave Washburn" <dwashbur AT nyx.net>
  • To: b-hebrew AT franklin.oit.unc.edu
  • Subject: Re: Genesis 1 & 2
  • Date: Sun, 5 Dec 1999 14:23:04 -0700


Paul,
> I wrote (in part) and then Dave Washburn responded (in part):
>
> > > But, as has been stated in previous discussions on this matter,
> there is
> > > also a change of verb roots here, from (&H in Gen 1:25 to YCR in
> 2:19.
> > > The difference may be significant, with the Genesis 2 form referring
> not
> > > to a creation (in the sense that that word is normally used in a
> > > biblical setting) but rather a forming of examples of lifeforms
> > > previously created. If this is the case, the use of the wayyiqtol
> can
> > > still carry the sense of consecutive activities that many approaches
> > > still ascribe, at least in part, to the wayyiqtol in Hebrew prose.
> >
> > I understand what you're saying, but I'm not sure how it resolves
> > the apparent contradiction about the order of humans vs. animals?
>
> I am not trying to reopen an old thread, but I will try to clear up this
> one point.
>
> Day 6, according to Genesis 1, God made animals, then man. The
> formation of the animals in Genesis 2 could well have been God
> fashioning examples only of the animals that he had already created in
> order to check if any of them would serve as a suitable companion for
> the man. IOW, if there were 100 giraffes before, there were now 101,
> one of which was presented to Adam. What occurs in Genesis 2 is very
> similar to our drawing illustrations on the chalkboard or forming
> statues, only God could make them alive. That is why I think the use of
> YCR in Gen 2:19 could well be significant, especially since the more
> generic (&H could have been used, but wasn't. And it makes that actions
> as subsequent to the formation of man from the dust of the ground.
>
> Just my thots, but it works for me!

I'm glad it works for you, but it seems unnecessarily complicated
to me, and actually almost looks to me like an ad hoc solution
designed to preserve a theory. I'm not saying that's what it is, just
that it could easily appear so to me.


Dave Washburn
http://www.nyx.net/~dwashbur
Teach me your way, O Lord, and I will walk in your truth;
give me an undivided heart that I may fear your name.
Psalm 86:11




Archive powered by MHonArc 2.6.24.

Top of Page