Skip to Content.
Sympa Menu

b-hebrew - [b-hebrew] bara vs' bero in Genesis 1:1

b-hebrew AT lists.ibiblio.org

Subject: Biblical Hebrew Forum

List archive

Chronological Thread  
  • From: "JAMES CHRISTIAN READ" <JCR128 AT student.apu.ac.uk>
  • To: b-hebrew AT lists.ibiblio.org
  • Subject: [b-hebrew] bara vs' bero in Genesis 1:1
  • Date: Sun, 09 Jul 2006 14:30:06 +0100

> Yitzhak wrote:
> It is therefore significant that
> the word tehom is used as a proper name in the right place (before
> division of the seas).
> END QUOTE
>
> JCR: I think this is an overstatement that may well be
> quite a lot less significant than to imply a direct
> relation with the tiamat myth. There is nothing in
> the context whatsoever which personifies tehom and the
> sense is very much of a thing rather than a being.
>
> The very phrase ' The earth was formless and void, and
> darkness was over the surface of the deep' seems, in
> my mind, to recall only thoughts of lifeless matter
> that are yet to be prepared for the arrival of life.

Yitzhak:
The thing that you seem to be overlooking is that your
translation adds a "the" that is not present in the Hebrew
text. This would be equivalent to you writing in English,
"The earth was formless and void and darkness was over
the surface of Deep." Or "Abyss," or "Ocean." It is used
as a proper name. The use of this specific word, as a
proper name like this, at this place of the Creation story,
just appears to be too coincidental.
END QUOTE

JCR: The reason we have to add the word 'the' in English
translation is really quite simple. The fact is, we
don't have a concept of 'Ocean', 'Sea', 'Abyss' or
'Deep' which can be used as a proper name as these
are generic concepts and there can be many of each
one.

Another similar, though opposite, example of such
translation limitations is how haelohim is often
translated as 'God' in English which is used as a
proper name but in neither Greek nor Hebrew had this
usage as 'haelohim' and 'ho theos' are used as titles
which can be and are used of other gods.

Your observation is therefore not evidence of an
illusion to the foreign god Tiamat but merely linguistic
evidence that in hebrew there was a concept of 'Deep'
which was understood to be so singular in existence
that it could be attributed a proper name which is
untranslatable in English.

James C. Read
UK

















Archive powered by MHonArc 2.6.24.

Top of Page