Skip to Content.
Sympa Menu

b-hebrew - [b-hebrew] Genesis 1:1-5

b-hebrew AT lists.ibiblio.org

Subject: Biblical Hebrew Forum

List archive

Chronological Thread  
  • From: James Read <J.Read-2 AT sms.ed.ac.uk>
  • To: B-Hebrew <b-hebrew AT lists.ibiblio.org>
  • Subject: [b-hebrew] Genesis 1:1-5
  • Date: Sun, 20 Sep 2009 09:29:31 +0100

Hi all,

the first pe separated paragraph of Genesis (as you all know) is Genesis 1:1-5

?????? ??? ????? ?? ????? ??? ???? ????? ???? ??? ???? ???? ?? ??? ???? ???? ????? ????? ?? ??? ???? ????? ????? ??? ??? ???? ??? ???? ????? ?? ???? ?? ??? ????? ????? ??? ???? ???? ???? ????? ????? ???? ??? ????? ??? ???? ???? ??? ???? ??? ??? ???

Even such a simple section has many points worthy of discussion. The form brwyt has traditionally been translated as 'In the beginning' following the Greek ?? ???? and the Latin 'In principio'. It has been suggested (does anybody have the reference for this?) that this is a mistranslation and that the sense is not of an ultimate beginning but merely of a declaration of the initial state of things before Elohim set about creating stuff.

BR) has traditionally been understood as a synonym of 'make' but used exclusively with God and therefore an act of creation from nothing (ex nihilo). This view has also been challenged. It has been proposed, if memory serves correctly, to be a derivative of a root meaning of cutting the shape as a sculptor chisels a piece of wood (again, does anybody have the exact reference for this?).

?????? ??? ????? ?? ????? ??? ???? has traditionally been translated as 'In the beginning God created the heavens and the earth'. This translation I challenge as a misrepresentation of what the original Hebrew actually said. The terms ???? and ??? are most commonly used with the sense of 'sky' and 'land' from the human perspective of what is generally above and below and I think this was the sense of the original Hebrew.

????? ???? ??? ???? This phrase we have discussed many times with respect to the traditional understanding of the earth being formless and waste in its initial state of creation.

???? ?? ??? ???? 'And it was dark on the surface of Tehom'. This phrase is often used as argument that the creation account is an adaptation of the Babylonian creation myth involving Tiamat. While such a vain discussion can have much comical value it seems clear to me that 'Tehom' was the proper name of the universal ocean that covered the land in its initial creation state.

???? ????? ????? ?? ??? ???? This phrase is interesting. How best to translate ???? Literally, it means breath and traditionally the phrase ??? ????? has been translated as 'God's spirit'. It has been suggested (does anybody have the reference?) that this is an idiomatic phrase meaning something like 'great wind', 'really strong wind' or 'gale force wind'. ????? is a difficult form to analyse occurring only once in the corpus. Traditional translations include 'hovering', 'moving back and forth'. If we were to go with the 'great wind' translation perhaps we could theorise a 'and a great wind was blowing on the surface of the waters' translation.

In any case, it would seem that the general picture being built up is of an initial land and sky in total darkness. The land being covered with a vast ocean and either God's breathe or a great wind active in some way on the surface of the water (do we imagine this being visible by disturbance on the surface of the water?).

????? ????? ??? ??? Traditionally we translation this as 'And God said "Let there be light"'. The 'let there be light' idiom we owe to William Tyndale who coined the phrase structure 'let there be...'. Personally, I don't think this is particularly good English (at least not in our modern world). I see this as a direct command 'Make light!'. The Greek of the LXX agrees with the thought of a direct command using the verb 'to make' but uses the passive version '??? ????? ? ???? ???????? ???'. In English, we get the awkward translation of 'light be made' which can be made more palatable by a return to the 'let...' structure 'let light be made'.

We then go on to see that light was made and Elohim said that it was good ???? ??? ???? ????? ?? ???? ?? ???.

????? ????? ??? ???? ???? ???? We are told that Elohim 'made a division' between the light and the darkness. I'm not sure of this translation. What does it mean to 'make a division'? I feel that this may be an idiomatic phrase but I'm not sure. Could it mean that Elohim 'defined' light and darkness?

???? ??? ???? ??? 'And there was evening and there was morning'. This phrase provokes many questions especially seeing that the Sun had not yet been made. What exactly does this phrase mean? We know that the Hebrew day began and ended with sunset and went from the evening of one day to the next. Does this phrase really suggest a literal sunset and sunrise when there was yet no Sun? Did the Hebrews not even associate the phenomenon of daylight as originating with the Sun? Or is this just a poetic way of marking the beginning and end of one of Elohim's workloads?

??? ??? Unlike following sections this section ends with a cardinal number rather than an ordinal number. Literally 'day one' rather than 'the first day'. I've never really been sure why. Any suggestions?

???? ??? ???? ??? ??? ??? Finally, could this be a construct form? That is to say could this be 'And there was sunset and sunrise of day one?'

James Christian

--
The University of Edinburgh is a charitable body, registered in
Scotland, with registration number SC005336.






Archive powered by MHonArc 2.6.24.

Top of Page