Biblical Hebrew Forum

["K Randolph" <kwrandolph AT gmail.com>]

Jill:

You are assuming that "TLDT" (alternately spelled TWLDT, TWLDWT, and
TLDWT) refers to generations. But words from that root include
bringing forth of things that are not children. Hence it can also
refer to "bringing forth" as in narration. (Giving birth is one type
of bringing forth.)

An example is Genesis 6:9 where the word is not connected with any
record of generations. Similarly Genesis 37:2a ends the story where
Jacob is the main protagonist, to where Joseph is, with no list of
generations.

As for the title and author being listed at the end of a document
instead at the front as in modern practice, historians have told me
that that was a common ANE practice that ended about the mid second
millennium BC. That it is included in Genesis is a clue that Genesis
was compiled from older documents, from the mid second millennium BC
and older.

As for the form of BHBR)M בהבראם yes it is niphal for a lamed alep
verb with a mem suffix.

Karl W. Randolph.

On 7/17/06, jvass AT indiana.edu <jvass AT indiana.edu> wrote:
> Dear all,
> Regarding the line Bereshit 5:1, "zeh seifer toldat Adam...":
>
> Seifer refers to written documentation of the lineage of Adam, which
> follows this verse rather than precedes it. So I do not understand how
> this could be an author's signature of what precedes it, particularly
> as it begins a chapter and what follows is precisely what it introduces.
>
> Chapter five contrasts quite a bit from the lineages of noah {beginning
> with " 'eleh toldot noah..", in Isaiah 43:9, and the lineage of the
> sons of Noah beginning with the words " 'eleh toldot
> benei-noah shem, ham ve yafet.." in Bereshit 10:1.   What follows those
> two statements which lack the word 'seifer' seem to be folk narratives
> or oral history describing groups of peoples and their characteristics
> whereas what we have in chapter five is a specific genealogy of a
> family line for ten generations.
>
> Whoever kept these records, it would seem they refer to chapter five.
>
> My question is: What is the verb "be hibar'am in 2:4?  It is nifal, is
> it a past tense form for lamed alef?    This is the line that seems to
> introduce the second creation story ('eleh toldot hashmayim ve ha'aretz
> behibar'am…) or perhaps join the two stories.
>
> Best,
> Jill