[b-hebrew] Gen 1 & Gen 2
enkidu at bigpond.net.au
Wed Oct 31 20:20:39 EDT 2007
> That's if you assume that TWLDWT always refers to generations. But
> what I noticed is that the verb itself is not always connected with
> giving birth, sometimes it refers to the broader sense of bringing
> forth, so the derivative TWLDWT is not necessarily connected with
> generations. Once that's accepted, then the anomalous uses make sense.
> In these uses, I connect the noun with the broader meaning of bringing
> forth. These are the things that the author wants to impart, to bring
> forth. As such, the noun has no connections with generations.
I'm afraid it still doesn't make sense to me! If the usage is
supposedly based on an aNE precedent but is then used anomalously, how
were the readers meant to identify it? Even if תולדות is "not
always connected with giving birth," is it ever connected with
authoring a text (from a quick search I can't even find anywhere ילד
is used in such a context)? There are certainly other ascriptions of
authorship in the Hebrew Bible, but none to my knowledge that uses
this sort of terminology. The aNE colophons which you claim lend
support to your position do not lend it any support because they use
language which is unambiguous and which more closely reflects explicit
ascriptions to authorship in the HB (i.e. the ones I've seen do not
use this sort of language either).
All this suggests to me that there's no basis for your claim aside
from the fact that it makes some sense to you.
More information about the b-hebrew