Biblical Hebrew Forum

["Vadim Cherny" <VadimCherny AT mail.ru>]

Perhaps we should read the text rather than interpret it. Literal reading of
Gen2 doesn't support the second creation view.

http://vadimcherny.org/judaism/destruction_humanity_drought.htm

Vadim Cherny



> > From: kenneth greifer Sent: Tuesday, July 04, 2006 12:11 PM
> >
> > Could Genesis 2:19 be about a second creation where G-d creates the
> > animals
> > again , but this time to let Adam pick a help-mate?
>
> > Maybe in the first creation story the animals were made for their own >
>
> > kind,
> > but this time G-d was going to make a help-mate for Adam, so He made the
> > animals again from the ground, and He wanted Adam to declare which will
be
> > for him.
> >
> > I am not saying that there were two creation stories stuck together like
a
> > lot of anti-Bible or anti-Torah critics say, but a second creation of
the
> > animals within the 6 days of creation for a specific purpose.
> >
> [Steve Miller]
> This question was from July. I think it is an excellent question, but, I
> don't see how God could form again from the ground animals that he had
> already formed from the ground the day before.
>
> I too am not satisfied as of now with the normal explanation of
translating
> Gen 2:19 as past perfect, but I need to study it much more. There are
cases
> where a vav-consecutive is past-perfect, but it is rare. The normal way of
> expressing a past-perfect here would be to use asher (which) followed by a
> verb: "And God brought every beast of the field and every fowl of the
> heavens, which He had formed from the ground, to the man."
>
> An explanation that I am toying with is at least as wild as yours. It is
way
> under half-baked though. Perhaps God formed Adam on the 3rd day, after
> making the dry land. But the creation of man was not complete until He
built
> woman out of one of man's side-chambers on the 6th day. So the overview of
> creation in Gen 1 just says that God created mankind, male and female, on
> the 6th day.
> A big problem with this is: why then would God say on the 6th day, Let us
> create man in our image ....?
> If anyone can point out any other problems with this idea, I would be most
> grateful.
>
> >
> > Also, why does it say "...and He brought them to the man to see what He
> > will
> > call them...". I don't see the words "them" in the quote.
> >
>
> [Steve Miller] This was already answered that the direct object pronoun
> "them" is not necessary in b-hebrew. This is true. I looked at all the
> instances of hiphil imperfect "to bring" in Genesis, and when the thing
> being brought is not a person, the direct object pronoun "it" or "them" is
> usually left out. Examples are: Gen 27:14, 31, 33; 37:32. The only counter
> example in Gen. that I found was Gen 30:14.
>
> -Steve Miller
> Detroit
> www.voiceinwilderness.info
>
>
>