Skip to Content.
Sympa Menu

b-hebrew - Re: My understanding of Gen 1:1-3

b-hebrew AT lists.ibiblio.org

Subject: Biblical Hebrew Forum

List archive

Chronological Thread  
  • From: Andrew & Debby Kulikovsky <hermeneutics AT kulikovskyonline.net>
  • To: Yigal Levin <Yigal-Levin AT utc.edu>, Biblical Hebrew <b-hebrew AT franklin.oit.unc.edu>
  • Subject: Re: My understanding of Gen 1:1-3
  • Date: Wed, 14 Aug 2002 20:51:40 +0200


At 10:59 AM 14/08/2002 -0400, Yigal Levin wrote:
Andrew, while I can agree with most of what you wrote, please explain:

>2. v. 1 describes God's initial creative act - the creation of the
>"heavens and the earth" which is not a merism for "universe" (the
>Israelite people had no concept of a "universe" at this time), but a
>merism indicating the totality of all that exists, seen and unseen, on
>earth and in the heavens.

What is the difference between the "universe" and "the totality of all that
exists, seen and unseen, on earth and in the heavens"?

Ok. I should have explained this a bit better. The difference is subtle but I think "universe" is a word which has many connotations which would not have been considered by the original readers. Cassuto pointed this out as well. The use of the two terms "heavens" and "earth" is deliberate and meaningful. They indicate that God created all that is in the heavens, and all that is in the earth. But note that this initial creation of both the heavens and the earth was not complete which is indicated by the rest of the chapter
(ie. we have sun, moon and stars being created, and dry land etc). The language is also geocentric ie. describes things as seen from an observer on Earth. This is why the terms "earth", and "heavens" were used - even though the "earth" is insignificant with repect to the entire universe. This is not surprising since it is, after all, written to humans who live on this Earth.

So, yes there is some similarity between "universe" and "the totality of all that exists, seen and unseen, on earth and in the heavens" but the latter makes important distinctions not captured by the former, and the former introduces inappropriate connotations.


cheers,
Andrew
--
Andrew & Debby Kulikovsky
Check out my Biblical Hermeneutics web site:
http://hermeneutics.kulikovskyonline.net

Quis custodiet ipsos custodes?





Archive powered by MHonArc 2.6.24.

Top of Page