Tag Info

Hot answers tagged

17

She was his wife all along. It's just that the word "wife" is used only when the woman is being referred to in relation to the man. In Hebrew the difference between "woman" and "wife" is just a matter of whether there is a possessive suffix. In English we don’t say, "her man" or "his woman" (except with certain connotations). Instead we change the words to ...


11

Dinah, Jacob’s only daughter, born by Leah, was a virgin. She went out to see the daughters of the land. In Gen. 34:2-3, the narrator then uses a series of vav-consecutives to describe a sequence of events. And Shechem, the son of Hamor: v. 2: וַיַּרְא אֹתָהּ ("saw her") וַיִּקַּח אֹתָהּ ("took her") וַיִּשְׁכַּב אֹתָהּ ("lay with her," i.e. "had ...


11

When considering the NET translation one should always consider the footnotes. 4 tn Here is another sound play (paronomasia) on a name. The sound of the verb קָנִיתִי (qaniti, “I have created”) reflects the sound of the name Cain in Hebrew (קַיִן, qayin) and gives meaning to it. The saying uses the Qal perfect of קָנָה (qanah). There are two homonymic ...


10

OP's source that describes these particles as "unknown word(s)" is highly misleading. אֶת־ = ʾet is a Hebrew particle used to mark the definite direct object of a transitive verb; וְאֵ֥ת = wəʾet is the conjunction waw "and" (a.k.a. vav) followed by אֶת. Their usage in Genesis 1:1 is typical of the thousands of ocurrences found in the Hebrew Bible. ...


10

The Distribution You should notice as well that the declaration of "good" varies as to when it is said within a day in Genesis 1 (all references unless otherwise noted are to chapter 1). Day 1 - it is stated once right after the creation of light (v.4a) while the earth was still without form (v.2-3), but before the dividing of light and dark (v.4b-5). Day ...


10

Interesting question! I'm not sure it admits of a definitive answer, but some observations suggest one possibility. As noted by OP, the typical divine response to each day's acts of creation tends to be "impersonal": וַיַּרְא אֱלֹהִים כִּי־טוֹב wayyarʾ ĕlōhîm kî-ṭôb and God saw that [it was] good This is the response in Gen 1:10, 12, 18, 21, and ...


9

According to Genesis, Noah's ark was box shaped. At 300 cubits long (450 feet), 50 cubits wide (75 feet), and 30 cubits high (45 feet), the shape is not round. Genesis 6:15-16 And this is the fashion which thou shalt make it of: The length of the ark shall be three hundred cubits, the breadth of it fifty cubits, and the height of it thirty cubits. A ...


9

Good question. While no state of maturity for Adam and Eve at creation is ever explicitly stated in the Bible, there are some texts where we can infer something about their state. Adam is created to work the garden and care for it (Genesis 2:15). He then names the animals (Genesis 2:19, 20). This is not something that an infant could do. Adam and Eve are ...


9

Depending on its context, אֶרֶץ can be translated as ground, earth, land, piece of ground, territory, country, region, earth, or underworld.1 It's a very common word. This is not to say it can be translated as any of these in any context, the context (esp. specific phrases in which it's used) guides how it should be understood. Below is a visual ...


8

The Idea in Brief The editorial dots in the text appear to indicate that Esau's kissing was insincere. Discussion One of the most remarkable resources available today for studying the Masoretic Text is the Introduction to the Tiberian Masorah by the late Professor Israel Yeivin. This handbook provides an excellent primer for understanding the details and ...


7

My question is: Is there a place in Scripture from which we can draw a dogmatic conclusion as to whether Adam was created as a fully developed man, or as a new born babe? Based on the nature of the literary genre of Genesis, and comparisons of Gen.1-3 with other origin stories of ancient near eastern literature I would say the answer to your ...


7

As far as I know, the only other place in the Old Testament where this same Hebrew term ("desire for you") is used, is in the next chapter, when God speaks to Cain. "If you do well, will you not be accepted? And if you do not do well, sin is crouching at the door. Its desire is for you, but you must rule over it.” (Genesis 4:7, ESV) In the literary ...


7

I do not pretend to know the minds of the ESV revisers. But there is some justification for their rendering of Genesis 2:16, although exploring the (possible) reasoning cannot be done briefly. Here we go... Genesis 2:16-17 We need the text, and in this case it is imperative to work from the Hebrew, with the immediate context also in view (I'll stick with ...


7

One variation that jumps out pertains to the statement, "And God saw that it was good." There is another very significant variation that points to another pattern in the structure of Genesis 1 and explains the omission in day 2: day 5 is the only day that lacks the parallel phrase "and it was so"1. The reason why this is significant and connected with ...


7

(1) [OP] Is it meant as a summary of what precedes it or as an introduction to what follows it? That's a very good question. On the face of it, it would appear to be an introduction. This formula, usually referred to simply as the "toledot" formula (from the Hebrew ...אֵלֶּה תֹולְדֹות = ʾēlleh tolədôt... "these are the generations of...") occurs a ...


7

It is clear from the text of Genesis 5 that Enoch was certainly viewed as being different from the other patriarchs. The major differences we can see within the text itself are that Enoch a) died early, and b) died in a manner different than the other patriarchs. The patriarchs listed in Chapter 5 all lived between 777 and 969 years, except for Enoch, who ...


7

The semantic range of אֶרֶצ ('eretz') revolves around the idea of "land" (cf. BDB). It can mean "land" vs. sea & air, "country", or "ground". The semantic range of אֲדָמָה ('adamah') revolves around the idea of "soil" (cf. BDB). It can mean the soil that you till, a piece of [tillable] property, earth as material substance, the visible surface of the ...


7

This is not the "same word" repeated and used in different ways. These are homonyms, i.e., two different words: the first אֶת־ is the sign of the definite direct object (= I. אֵת at link -- as discussed in relation to Genesis 1), which is untranslatable -- there is no English equivalent. When suffixes are added to it, it has the form ʾōt- or ʾôt-. the ...


6

Since our goal is to understand what the author of the text meant by what he wrote, it is more helpful to look at how the event is described by the author, in the text than to get hung up on semantic possibilities, ANE discoveries, or personal beliefs. The author clearly meant it to be understood as a global event. In addition to the evidence you already ...


6

The view one takes on the credibility of the assertion is going to depend largely on one's presuppositions and level of allowance for the Bible text to speak for itself. If the Torah (Law, i.e. "teaching" is the idea in Hebrew, not just the actual commands and prohibitions), which includes Genesis, was formed contra what critical scholars claim, and instead ...


6

Kennedy summarizes his view on p. 5, and OP's sense that the paseq is a rough equivalent to how we use [sic] strikes me as about right. Kennedy's view, however, doesn't seem like a plausible -- or at least certainly not a sufficient -- explanation of this masoretic notation. On the one hand, there are just too many instances in which no such "warning" is ...


6

Jews reject the argument that Cain's sacrifice was insufficient because it did not involve blood, and they have some good arguments. Leviticus clearly spells out various "grain offerings," and there is even one example of a "sin offering" where the poor people were allowed to offer grain instead of an animal sacrifice. (See Lev. 5:11-13.) The traditional ...


5

There are some helpful reflections in the existing answers, although one flaw affects them all, and it is embedded in the question, as posed, itself... The Meaning of ṢDQ? The flaw is the assumption that Hebrew verb (in Gen 38:26) ṣādaq should be understood here as "righteous", where "righteous" stands for some kind of ethical purity next to holiness ...


5

This theory is pretty credible. There a great deal of scholars which entertain this idea who are collectively known as Panbabylonists. This seems to raise the ire of many purists who would like to believe that Genesis was influenced by God alone. In my opinion, however many fail to consider the idea that perhaps sections of Genesis were not derived from ...


5

Assuming a literal reading of the text (which is how the hermeneutic I hold takes Genesis), then in one 24 hour period, the 6th day of creation, Adam (and by extension on some of the points, Eve) was:1 Made fully capable of understanding language, as God spoke to them (Gen 1:28; cf. Gen 2:15-17) Made fully capable of sexual reproduction to multiply on the ...


5

Note: Since some gap theory arguments rely on phrasing in the King James, I will be quoting from the KJV unless otherwise noted. All verses will be examined in the KJV, other versions will be listed if they correct or add to the discussion. The Gap Theory, sometimes called the Ruin and Reconstruction Theory of creation, postulates that an unspecified amount ...


5

Rashi simply explains that the work begun on Day 2 was not completed until the middle of the third day. Hence, an uncompleted piece of work could not properly be pronounced as "good." At verse 11, during Day 3, God proclaims His creation to that point "good," and moves on and puts plants and trees into the earth he just created, also calling it good.


5

Gen. 7:6 says that Noah was (literally) ‘the son of 600 years’ ( בן שש מאות שנה) when the flood began. This is an idiom in Hebrew, and in other Semitic languages (e.g. Arabic and Syriac) meaning ‘600 years old’, that is: in the year beginning with his 600th birthday. You can compare the Syriac translation (Pšīttā) of John 8:57, which has ܥܕ݂ܰܟ݁ܺܝܠ ܒ݁ܰܪ ...


4

Some argue that Job 40:15:24 mentions Behemoth and Leviathan and that these are dinosaurs, however radiometric dating indicates that most or all dinosaurs died out millions of years before Job. On the other hand, Technically Crocodiles are Dinosaurs so the answer is "all of them." It is also possible that the Leviathan is a Plesiosaur and this dinosaur ...


4

The Idea in Brief From the perspective of the Hebrew Bible, there are three apparent reasons why there is a “gap” of indefinite time between Gen 1:1 and Gen 1:2. Discussion First, the Hebrew Scriptures indicate that the Lord did not create the earth formless and void. The word for “create” (בָּרָא) in the following verse is the same word for “create” ...



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