TOHUW WA BOHUW, Gen & Jer. (hyth)

Dave Washburn dwashbur at nyx.net
Wed Apr 3 11:53:19 EST 2002


Peter,
I'm not sure I understand why you're pushing for a pluperfect here.  I 
see no reason not to view the X-qatal as concurrent with v.1: "In the 
beginning God created the heavens and the earth.  The earth [at 
that point] was TOHU and BOHU etc."  At a discourse level, I see 
v.2 narrowing the scope of the narrative.  We have creation of both 
heavens and earth in v.1, then we focus on earth for the rest of the 
discourse.

> To me, what fits the Hebrew and the context is "had become" which is
> almost equivalent to "was", but not "then became".
> 
> Peter Kirk
> 
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Glenn Blank [mailto:glennblank at earthlink.net]
> > Sent: 03 April 2002 17:04
> > To: Biblical Hebrew
> > Subject: RE: TOHUW WA BOHUW, Gen & Jer. (hyth)
> > 
> > 
> > >From: "Peter Kirk" <Peter_Kirk at sil.org>
> > >Date: Wed, 3 Apr 2002 16:51:28 +0100
> > 
> > >The X-QATAL construction implies not consecutiveness
> > >but a previous state: "The earth had been TOHU..." The verb form is
> not
> > >enough to settle this issue decisively, but it is enough to suggest
> that
> > >as the more probable interpretation.
> > 
> > Hello, Peter, Lawrence, et al.
> > 
> > When I have seen the proposal Lawrence suggests discussed before, the
> > argument
> > seemed to hinge on whether hyth in gen 1.2 is to be interpreted as
> > "became" or "was."   Is this an issue, and how would it compare with
> the
> > copula not being explicit in jer 4.23?  And on what basis could it be
> > decided whether the copula in gen 1.2 conveys process or state?  The
> > arguments always
> > seemed inconclusive to me.
> > 
> > glenn blank
> > Pensacola FL
> > 
> > ----------
> > >From: Lawrence May <lgmay at mindspring.com>
> > >Date: Tue, 02 Apr 2002 15:11:33 -0700
> > >
> > >I believe Genesis 1:2 should be compared with Jeremiah 4:23.  These
> > verses
> > use both the
> > >words 'tohuw wa bohuw.'  Jeremiah used it to describe the Southern
> > Kingdom
> > after its
> > >destruction by the Chaldeans and Israel's enemies. I believe Genesis
> 1:2
> > describes the
> > >Earth after the rebellion of  Lucifer and his followers. What
> linguistic
> > analysis is
> > >there that would deny this interpretation?
> > 
> 
> 
> ---
> You are currently subscribed to b-hebrew as: [dwashbur at nyx.net]
> To unsubscribe, forward this message to $subst('Email.Unsub')
> To subscribe, send an email to join-b-hebrew at franklin.oit.unc.edu.
> 
> 

Dave Washburn
http://www.nyx.net/~dwashbur
This time, like all times, is a very good one if we but know what to do 
with it.
                  -Emerson




More information about the b-hebrew mailing list