Hot answers tagged

13

Firmament The primary reason the word "firmament" has been updated in modern translation (using the term "changed" is incorrect - new translations start with the original language, not the KJV text) is because language changes. While the word was an ordinary one in 1611 meaning something like The arch or vault of heaven overhead, in which the clouds ...


9

The Hebrew text of Gen. 1:1-2 states, א בְּרֵאשִׁית בָּרָא אֱלֹהִים אֵת הַשָּׁמַיִם וְאֵת הָאָרֶץ ב וְהָאָרֶץ הָיְתָה תֹהוּ וָבֹהוּ וְחֹשֶׁךְ עַל פְּנֵי תְהוֹם וְרוּחַ אֱלֹהִים מְרַחֶפֶת עַל פְּנֵי הַמָּיִם First, notice that v. 2 commences with a disjunctive vav, i.e. וְהָאָרֶץ. One website explains the disjunctive relationship as follows: The ...


9

Expanded Context This verse cannot be taken in isolation from those immediately around it. So let me quote Gen 2:20b-25 (KJV; slightly reformatted and some Hebrew words noted): but for Adam there was not found an help meet for him. 21 And the LORD God caused a deep sleep to fall upon Adam, and he slept: and he took one of his ribs, and closed up the ...


9

The watering of the ground was imperfect in aspect because of the waw consecutive appears here with the perfect tense (and so “flips” the aspect from perfect to imperfect in alignment with the preceding verb in context, which is imperfect in aspect). Please click on the image to view the full source document, which comes from Gesenius, § 112 3(a)(α), who ...


8

וְדָבַ֣ק ("cleave") Comparing several translations, there is a wide variety on how the verb וְדָבַ֣ק is translated. The NIV uses "is united", ESV "hold fast", NASB "be joined", NRSV "clings", while older translations (KJV, ASV, Douay-Rheims) use "shall cleave". Cleave is an archaic word that is not really used much anymore, but its seems every modern ...


7

There are several creation accounts in antiquity from two main areas in the fertile crescent; Babylon/Sumer and Egypt. I will attempt to summarize and compare/contrast points of each creation myth with Genesis, so I will apologize at the outset to readers for the long answer. I'm sure the OP did not realize what a tall order this was, and as curiousdannii ...


7

According to a variety of commentaries the name Abram means "high father" while Abraham means "Father of a multitude". The reason it is only "probably" in your commentary is because the usage of the word raham is not clearly attested to in ancient Hebrew itself, but only in closely related languages. Ellicott's Commentary explains it well, plus offers a ...


7

The theory that 120 years refers to the remaining life of Adam does not seem to be supportable from the chronology in chapter 5: Genesis 5 tells us that Adam lived for 930 years, so this statement would have happened when he was 810 years old. According to the chronology in chapter 5, this places the statement after the birth of Methusela (Noah's ...


7

Not poetry, but Prologue Gordon J. Wenham notes in The Word Biblical Commentary Vol. 1: Genesis 1-15 on page 46 ...[Genesis 1:1–2:3] stands apart from the narratives that follow in style and content and makes it an overture to the whole work. On page 50 he continues: Extrabiblical creation stories from the ancient Near East are usually poetic, ...


6

As noted in other answers, the meaning of גֹּפֶר seems lost to us, and any translation must therefore be speculative. To support the translation "cypress", however, consider the following extract from Beekes/Van Beek, Etymological Dictionary of Greek: κυπάρισσος [f.] 'cypress' (ε 64). <PG(V)> - VAR Att. -ιττος. [...] - ETYM Clearly a Pre-Greek ...


6

Onan's sin was entirely related to his refusal to perform his levirate duty. Quickly about the other three: Coitus interruptus is not masturbation. It is a (very unreliable) method of birth control. Onan was attempting not to get Tamar pregnant because he did not want to provide an heir for his deceased older brother. It was not "theft of Tamar's child." ...


6

Mark Edward did a fantastic job of covering the Biblical link between the serpent and Satan, so I will not re-hash that, but I would like to directly address the second part of the OPs question: was John the first to link these two figures together? Or had the two already been connected in Jewish thought at the time? If not, is there any way to explain ...


6

I think the key to translating Genesis 1:2 is not וְר֣וּחַ (we·ruach, "spirit"), but rather מְרַחֶ֖פֶת (me·rachepheth, "moved"). Better understanding the verb will help us better understand the subject. rachaph (the root) is a rare verb. It occurs just three times in the Old Testament: here, Deuteronomy 32:11: Like an eagle that stirs up its nest, ...


6

It cannot be deduced that Naphtali had sex with Bilhah by the Biblical texts. 1 Chronicles 7:13 is not saying that Naphtali had his children with Bilhah. Bilhah is mentioned in 1 Chronicles 7:13 because Naphtali was her second son by Jacob, according to Genesis 30:1-8. Naphtali's sons can be rightly called her sons as well. In fact, some translations render ...


6

There are a number of indicators: Themes In the texts in Chapter 11 and earlier, all of the stories are about God's punishment of mankind. While the theme of salvation is present in these texts, there is also a theme of the depravity of mankind and their continual fall from grace. This theme isn't really present in the texts after Chapter 11 - only the ...


6

They fly across the expanse of the heavens. The word פָּנִים pānîm (lit. "faces") is used in "frozen union" with certain prepositions to form constructions that function syntactically as prepositions, linking a verbal idea to a noun.1 That is, they allow a noun to specify something about the nature of the verb. This is no different from other prepositional ...


6

The consonantal text of Genesis 1:1 as quoted by OP is the only ancient Hebrew text known for this verse: בראשית ברא אלהים את השמים ואת הארץ brʾšyt brʾ ʾlhym ʾt hšmym wʾt hʾrṣ The oldest known manuscript of this famous text is from the Dead Sea Scrolls, 4Q7 = 4QGeng. Unfortunately it is a broken text, but there is sufficient visible (for the purposes ...


6

No, Vawter is not correct. The Hebrew does likely have two absolute Hebrew word forms next to one another in the construction of הָאֵל֙ בֵּֽית־אֵ֔ל ("the God Bethel"), which can mean an appositional relation ("the God, i.e., Bethel), whereas strictly speaking, "God of Bethel" would have God in a construct form. But Vawter and other such solutions posing ...


5

The name Zoar in this passage is spelled צֽוֹעַר but elsewhere (Genesis 13:10, Genesis 14:2, etc.) is spelled צֹעַר. I mention the spelling variation, because it is easier to see the connection to the root verb, צָעַר (ṣāʿar), which means "to be, or grow, insignificant". That is, the only difference is the vocalization - both are צער (ṣʿr) in unpointed ...


5

It is hard to know how else to translate this idiomatically in English otherwise. Even sticking with the MT, the verb sequence makes it clear that 2:10-14 is an "offline" digression describing the one-into-four river (a bit unnatural, that). The "waw consecutives" (or past narratives or whatever you want to call them) make a continuous sequence, bracketing ...


5

Hebrew ṣelāʽ (thus the correct transliteration) is a clear cognate of Akkadian ṣēlu and Arabic ḍilʽ and ḍilaʽ, all of which primarily mean “rib”, but are also metaphorically used to mean “side”. They are very widely attested in Akkadian and Arabic and leave no doubt as to their meaning. It is a basic Semitic noun for a body part. From a linguistic point of ...


5

Strictly speaking, Shua (Judah's wife) does not “תסף” Shelah as this isn't a verb which takes an object. This verb (root ysp) is a verb which means "add", or "continue", often in the company of the adverb עוד "again" as quoted above.1 It is a fairly common Hebrew idiom (see Gesenius-Kautzsch-Cowley §120d) for continuing a sequence of repeated actions. ...


5

Perhaps someone can explain why some translations of Genesis 3:8 refer to the "voice of the Lord" walking in the garden, and others simply state "the Lord." The difference at hand is between: the voice of the LORD (KJV, etc.) and the sound of the LORD" (NIV, etc.). The translators of the NIV and ESV presumably thought that "voice" was not ...


5

One view (and the view I hold to) of the Genesis account in Gen 1:1-2:3 indicates that God created a fully functioning creation at the end of seven days, with the earth, plants, animals, heavenly bodies, and mankind all formed to function as an interrelated whole like God intended. Genesis 2:4-25 is an expanded history of what is stated to have transpired ...


5

There are two reasonable explanations that may apply here. First, when ground is watered, that water both drains into the ground and evaporates back into the air. The surface of the ground does not forever remain wet from a mist. So that watering by mist occurred does not mean dust did not come again. The text in Gen 2:6 is not explicit as to exactly when ...


4

A theological answer would indicate that Rabbinic Jewish and early Christian thinkers did not attribute bodily form or sex to God, though most attributed male gender owing to the preponderance of typically masculine imagery and grammatical forms for God they saw in the Bible. Growing gender awareness has challenged traditional assumptions, and most Jewish ...


4

The answer is very simple. First, as already noted by the OP, the Hebrew word for seed (zera`) is both collective and singular. Throughout the Hebrew Bible the particular word occurs in the grammatical singular but with reference to the collective plural sense (and sometimes even to the singular sense); in these respects context is very important. For ...


4

The answer to your question is best examined by looking at Onan's sin in the context of the exchange between Judah and Tamar and requires a good understanding and background of the place of women in ancient middle eastern culture and the purpose of Leverite marriage practices. We must remember that this culture had no medicare and no social security. ...


4

The Hebrew word for man is אָדָם (adam) or אּישׁ (ish). The "out of man" (מֵאִ֖ישׁ meish, also transliterated me’iysh) in this passage derives from the latter form. Like in Gen 2:23, ish often carries a definite connection with males (as opposed to "mankind"), but has a variety of uses. You can explore the usage of all forms of ish here and meish here. ...


4

No. Only Reuven slept with Bilhah. When it says "בְּנֵ֥י בִלְהָֽה" ("[these are the] sons of Bilhah"), it is not referring only to the four sons of Naftali mentioned in verse 13, but to all of the descendants of Bilhah mentioned, from verse 1 to verse 13. This is parallel to the verses in Genesis 46:23-25: וּבְנֵי־דָ֖ן חֻשִֽׁים׃ וּבְנֵ֖י נַפְתָּלִ֑י ...



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