Genesis 1:6 Why בין מים למים instead of בין מים ובין מים

Question

Genesis 1:6 ויאמר אלהים יהי רקיע בתוך המים ויהי מבדיל בין מים למים׃

(KJV) And God said, Let there be a firmament in the midst of the waters, and let it divide the waters from the waters.

(YLT) And God saith, 'Let an expanse be in the midst of the waters, and let it be separating between waters and waters.'

When God divides the light and the darkness in Genesis 1:4, notice that it is written בין האור ובין החשך. This same schema "ben X uben Y" is used throughout the scriptures when X and Y are being separated/distinguished. But Genesis 1:6 introduces another schema, "ben X la-Y." Are the two schemas equivalent in meaning? At first glance, they appear to be, but I'm not totally convinced.

The schema "ben X la-Y" seems like it could be directed, whereas "ben X uben Y" looks more symmetric. Perhaps "ben X la-Y" could mean distinguishing X from Y whereas "ben X uben Y" could mean distinguishing X and Y? I must admit, however, these would be virtually indentical in meaning.

If there is no difference, why would the Author of Genesis 1:6 prefer "ben mayim la-mayim" instead of "ben mayim uben mayim?"

Answer 1

Good eye for detail. I was unable to word a question sufficiently to see whether there is a grammar rule for "bin" usage. So, below are just preliminary observations.

Perhaps it's a case of comparing unlike things / like things: apples and oranges vs apples to apples

Lev. 11:47 - ...between the~unclean and~between the~clean....

Deut. 17:8 - ...matter for~(the)~~judgment between blood to~blood...

2Chr. 19:10 - ... in~cities-of~them between blood to~blood, between law to~instruction, to~statutes and~to~judgments

---

Ezek. 42:20 - ...to-separate-of between the~holiness to~profane... (which seems to be a range?). Also Ezek. 44:23.

---

Then again...Jonah 4:11 - ...human who not he-knows between right-(hand)-of~him to~left-of~him.... (?)

Answer 2

The two schemas are not equivalent.

The final schema completes the work of preparing the earth for life. After this there is a planet whose surface has both water and dry land surrounded by the heavens. Prior to this there was no dry land. In other words, the second work divided waters which were on the surface (from the second day). The division created something new, but what was new was not a division within the waters. Rather is was the dry land now in the midst of the waters. Or, stated differently, the work of dividing the waters did not change the make up of the waters.

The theory of a single land mass called Pangaea which surfaced in the early 1900's, helps to visualize this work of creation: a planet which originally was all water, now had a land mass surrounded by water. The point is the water, although divided, was still the same.

This differs from the first schema which resulted in two "bodies" of water: one on the surface of the earth (which is divided on the third day) and one above the firmament called heaven(s), which separated the two waters.

The work of division was essentially the same and yet the results were slightly different. The first resulting in two bodies; the second in land surrounded by one of the bodies of water from the previous day.

An apple and orange can be use to illustrate. The first division resulted in two different: an apple and an orange. The second divided only the orange. After the second work, the dry land is called "Earth" and the waters "Seas." At the end of the third day there are waters (apple) above the heaven(s) and seas (orange) beneath.

The variation in language is necessary to correctly describe the physical process.

Answer 3

The difference is related specifically to how the Hebrew word raqia is translated, therefore how the author is both interpreting and defining this word.

The use of "firmament" describes a space of separation over two dimension between the heavens and the earth, in addition to a solid formation that "holds" against heaven, over which a realm or layer of water would then have to exist.

It therefore gives two fixed locations of water relative to the firmament, in addition to blurring the definition and interpretation of heaven with firmament.

The better use of "expanse" is to describe the first separation in the "midst", that is along a vertical axis as above and below, and a second separation that occurs along a separate axis. So now you dont have a single layer of water above the expanse/firmament, but you have multiple "puddles" of water that sit/move on the expanse/firmament.

It is these "puddles" of water that God fills with light, which then provides light to earth. These are the stars as described in Genesis, which includes the 12 constellations of the zodiac, in addition to the sun, moon, and planets. By considering the stars to be made from water, the author shows why and how these "lights" move across the horizon and sky.