Tag Info

Hot answers tagged

13

I disagree with Young's there. Hebrew syntax is very different than English, but I have difficulty seeing how Young got there. Tense in Biblical Hebrew is non-existent (Essentials of Biblical Hebrew, Kyle Yates). It is context that determines the time of the word. Hebrew uses "aspect" (An Introduction to Biblical Hebrew Syntax, Waltke/O'Connor) which is ...


12

Disclaimer on Perspective For the record, I do not hold to the Documentary Hypothesis (JEDP theory) as another answer here gives as a solution. I believe the Pentateuch was largely (if not perhaps wholly) inscribed by a single inspired author, Moses. As such, the Pentateuch should be looked at as a unity, including Gen 1:1-2:3 in relation to Gen 2:4 and ...


11

Something interesting I noticed in the Hebrew of Gen 1 is that almost every verse begins with a waw-consecutive. That is a grammatical construct that indicates a direct, chronological sequence. That is, "A [wc] B [wc] C" means "A and then B and then C." It's very common in prose narratives, and is usually translated simply as "and." (My translations of ...


11

I have often wondered the same thing. Here's what we can get from the text itself: The word in 1:1 is בָּרָא , which means "created". This is different from עָשָׂה , "made", in 2:2. The difference as I have been taught is that "create" (בָּרָא ) means "out of nothing", while "make" is the more usual "making of stuff from stuff". Interestingly, 2:3 ...


10

Rashi understands b'tzelem ("in Our image") as "with Our mold/form/die" and kidmuteinu ("as Our likeness") as referring to understanding and wisdom: 26: in our image: in our form. (Saperstein translation says "mold") after our likeness: to understand and to discern. 27: And God created man in His image: [...] Man was made with a die, like a ...


9

The NET Bible notes are helpful here: tn The translation assumes that the form translated “beginning” is in the absolute state rather than the construct (“in the beginning of,” or “when God created”). In other words, the clause in v. 1 is a main clause, v. 2 has three clauses that are descriptive and supply background information, and v. 3 begins the ...


9

Enuma Elish and Genesis have the strongest connection in their first lines--"In the beginning" vs. "When on high." Some say that Genesis is written as a polemic against Enuma Elish. They are very different. 1a. Enuma Elish starts with the elemental representatives of chaos, Apsu and Tiamat. They are the father and mother of the gods respectively. It ...


9

If we translate the phrase וַיְהִי־עֶרֶב וַיְהִי־בֹקֶר (vayhi erev vayhi boker) as: "then there was evening; then there was morning" "and there was evening; and there was morning" then it reasons that 1) there was a time before the evening, and 2) Gen. 1:1-4 occur at that time before the evening. The repeated refrain, "and evening came, and morning ...


8

Complete order of events: I built my house I had a truck load of plants delivered I built the driveway I planted plants along the driveway and around the house Account of contractor #1: House was built Plants were truckloaded in Driveway was built Account of contractor #2: House was built Driveway was built Plants were planted around the house ...


7

Hermeneutic Circle Part of the problem that this question has suffered is known as the hermeneutic circle. The idea is that we use the text of the Bible to determine our doctrine. However, in order to interpret the text of the Bible, we have to come from a doctrinal predisposition. When we approach hermeneutics seeking to understand a particular ...


6

Umberto Cassuto, in his commentary to Genesis deals with this question: 'In our image, after our likeness' The Jewish exegets have endeavored to soften the corporeality implicit in the statement by means of forced interpretations....On the other hand, many modern commentators take the view that in fact we have here an unquestionably corporeal ...


6

A basic hermenuetical rule for any text is that the surface meaning is the correct reading of a text unless other evidence shows otherwise. If I say I'll finish something by the end of the day, you expect me to be done within the current 24-hour period. I would be either a nut or a liar if I explained that my "day" is actually 1,000 years metaphorically. ...


6

This is a difficult question because of the temptation towards Eisegesis as our desire to be of value can intersect with this text. It is useful to include verse 28 when looking at the verses you quote: 26Then God said, “Let us make man in our image, after our likeness. And let them have dominion over the fish of the sea and over the birds of the ...


6

The confusion comes in part from imperfect translation. The commandment, in both Exodus 20 and Deuteronomy 5, reads as follows: לֹא-תַעֲשֶׂה לְךָ פֶסֶל, וְכָל-תְּמוּנָה, אֲשֶׁר בַּשָּׁמַיִם מִמַּעַל, וַאֲשֶׁר בָּאָרֶץ מִתָּחַת--וַאֲשֶׁר בַּמַּיִם, מִתַּחַת לָאָרֶץ. Thou shalt not make unto thee a graven image, nor any manner of likeness, of any ...


6

Regarding Lilith Your question revolves around the discrepancy of details when reading Genesis 1-2 sequentially. In a strictly literal reading of these two texts together, it creates some obvious problems, one of which being the question of when humans, particularly men and women, were created. Some readers came to the idea that because Eve is specifically ...


5

Genesis 1 as a whole describes the creation of the physical world, so it would be inconsistent to view the light as figurative rather than physical unless you read the whole chapter that way. On that basis, then, the light is physical, but what is its nature? As summarized here, the talmud records a debate about the light in Chagigah 12a. One opinion is ...


5

Rashi's comment here is: male and female He created them: Yet further (2:21) Scripture states: “And He took one of his ribs, etc.” The Midrash Aggadah (Gen. Rabbah 8:1, Ber. 61a, Eruvin 18a) explains that He originally created him with two faces, and afterwards, He divided him. The simple meaning of the verse is that here Scripture informs you that they ...


5

From a Christian perspective, this passage is typically not seen as God and humanity sharing biological traits. One example, taken more or less at random, is this statement from Answers in Genesis: Man in the image of God; what does this mean in practical terms? It cannot refer to bodily, biological form since God is a Spirit and man is earthly. So ...


5

Even though many scholars and resources link the Bible's view of the cosmos with other ancient cosmologies, the evidence in the Bible for this is lacking. They talk (usually with diagrams) as if the Bible shows a flat earth (Isaiah 11:12 and Revelation 20:8), capped allegedly with a solid firmament (Genesis 1:7-8 and elsewhere), which was appropriately ...


3

This is a very big question, and I'm not even going to attempt to answer all of it here. I will observe, however, that these accounts have in fact been harmonized quite successfully by noting differences in location as well as difference in terminology. For instance, I point out that the supposedly late "vegetation" of 2:8–9 which you refer to is clearly ...


3

The rabbis of the talmud, recording received oral tradition, appear to understand God to have arranged the stars into their constellations. The following passage from Tractate B'rachot 58b (in the Babylonian talmud) comments on the passages brought in this question (among others): Samuel contrasted two texts. It is written, Who maketh the Bear, Orion, ...


3

The word for image is צלם which only appears outside of Genesis in the Tanakh in Daniel. There it's Aramaic, but it's always translated as "image." I don't see a problem with saying our physical appearance is representative of God. Many theological approaches to God say He has no physical qualities whatsoever but the verse seems to plainly say otherwise. ...


3

From the first chapter in Maimonides's Guide for the Perplexed: ...The term ẓelem, on the other hand, signifies the specific form, viz., that which constitutes the essence of a thing, whereby the thing is what it is; the reality of a thing in so far as it is that particular being. In man the "form" is that constituent which gives him human ...


3

IMO, this is the simplest explanation: And the earth was without form and void, and darkness was upon the face of the deep. And the Spirit of God moved upon the face of the waters. (Gen. 1:2) At this point everything is dark. And God said, "Let there be light"; and there was light. (3) Now everything is light. And God saw the light, that it ...


3

It's helpful to note that in Genesis 1, God not only separates light from darkness on the first day, but also waters from waters on the second day, and day from night on the fourth day. And God said, "Let there be an expanse in the midst of the waters, and let it separate the waters from the waters." And God made the expanse and separated the waters ...


3

This is Rashi's sillyness. The first words in the Hebrew bible are: בְּרֵאשִׁית, בָּרָא אֱלֹהִים, אֵת הַשָּׁמַיִם, וְאֵת הָאָרֶץ. Rashi said that you should relable the vowels on "Barah" and make it "Bro", so that it reads (sort of) like "In the beginning of God's creating the sky and the Earth..." This interpretation is incredibly stretched, you just ...


3

What these verses imply is that, whatever “image of God” implies, sex is irrelevant. In the Jewish view, since God has no physical form at all, it is meaningless to speak of His sex. The various Hebrew words that translate as “God” all have masculine grammatical gender. (The word for “spirit”, ruach, has feminine gender though, so the “spirit of God” which ...


2

The answer to the question There is no problem with this interpretation--- it is the way it reads most naturally in Hebrew. On chapter division The chapter division between Genesis 1 and Genesis 2 is placed at an awkward spot--- it falls 3 verses short of a real textual boundary, which represents the break between an Elohist narrative and Yahwist ...


2

There seems to be a common notion that this cannot be a physical likeness because God is spirit. However, I would like to present a different perspective and suggest that this image represents God's spiritual yet visible form. MANKIND WAS MADE TO LOOK LIKE GOD VISUALLY. An image is something that looks like something else. The image can be imaginary ...


2

The Day 6 riddle Gen 1:26 And God said, Let us make man in our image, after our likeness: 27 So God created man in his own image, in the image of God created he him; male and female created he them. We can't understand 'image' until we understand why God did not say he made man in his 'likeness' until here: Ge 5:1 ¶ This [is] the book of the ...



Only top voted, non community-wiki answers of a minimum length are eligible