Biblical Hebrew Forum

["George Athas" <gathas AT mail.usyd.edu.au>]

> > Lee R.Martin Wrote
> > I disagree, however, with your statement that Gen. 2:4 could come before
> Gen.
> > 1:1.  This is where Gunkel erred.  The Hebrew word "toledoth" does not
> mean
> > "origin," it means "progeny."  Gen 1 tells of the creation of "heaven and
> > earth," then Gen 2 tells of the progeny of heaven and earth.  Please see
> > Brevard Childs for an excellent theological explanation of the two
> accounts.
> > I have recently written a paper on the topic that will be published in the
> > spring in a Festschrift.
> > Lee R. Martin

Noel O'Riordan wrote:

> Frank Moore Cross also argues that 2:4 is in its correct position, and is
> used by P as a superscription to the paradise narrative.  (F.M.Cross
> Canaanite Myth and Hebrew epic. p302)
>

With the above posts, and another by Peter Kirk, I realise my post gave the 
impression
that the beginning of Genesis was just a random compilation of various source 
material.
That's not the impression I was trying to give. Of course Gen 2 should come 
after Gen 1
because of the thematic developments in each. What I originally intended to 
highlight was
that Gen 1 and Gen 2 were different accounts of creation and probably weren't 
even
associated together originally. Rather, it was by the deliberate choice of a 
scribe that
Gen 1 and Gen 2 were brought together. So, it was only by a compiler's design 
that Gen 1
preceded Gen 2, not because both chapters were written by the same original 
author.

Best regards,
George Athas
 Dept of Semitic Studies,
 University of Sydney
:::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::
Tel Dan Inscription Website
http://members.xoom.com/gathas/teldan.htm
:::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::
< gathas@ mail.usyd.edu.au >