Biblical Hebrew Forum

["JAMES CHRISTIAN READ" <JCR128 AT student.apu.ac.uk>]

I think a lot can be understood by first stepping back 
and taking a look at the bigger picture of the book of 
Genesis and the context as a whole.

Tradition holds that Moshe was the author of the Torah 
and that Genesis was a part of it. Now it is clear that 
Moshe was not a witness to the events in the book of 
Genesis and had to rely on sources either divine or 
traditional or most probably both.

The book of Genesis itself is clearly structured in a 
number of sections. The so-called 'histories' and the 
creation accounts. Now if we are to assume a line of 
human transition it would be reasonable to believe 
the second creation account and the histories were in 
so way preserved and passed down from faithful 
eyewitnesses. While the first creation account could 
not have had any earthly eyewitness at all and must 
have been a) made up by Moshe or b) given by Yah to 
Moshe. With these factors in mind reading the Torah 
from the beginning takes on a new light. The second 
creation account is more likely a version passed down
from Adam himself to his children as he saw the events
from his human perspective. While the first creation
account is more likely a revelation to Moshe directly
from Yah or one of his messengers. Also it is clear to
see that there is an agenda of teaching the holiness
of the seventh day in the first creation account.
This seems entirely reasonable as Moshe was a lawgiver
who expressed repeatedly the holiness of the seventh
day and thus this latest addition to the traditions
would have made a great final addition to the Torah
before handing it over to Joshua to be copied through
the generations.

James C. Read
UK





had any earthly eyewitness at all and must
have been a) made up by Moshe or b) given by Yah to
Moshe. With these factors in mind re