Genesis 1 & 2

Paul Zellmer zellmer at
Sat Dec 4 05:37:34 EST 1999

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
> > The difference may be significant, with the Genesis 2 form referring
> > 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
> > 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!


More information about the b-hebrew mailing list