Re: [asa] The Hebrew for the Making of Man

On Mon, 28 Jan 2008, David Opderbeck wrote:

> Here is an old (1965) article from the ETS bulletin arguing against TE based
> on the Hebrew in Gen. 2:
> http://www.biblicalstudies.org.uk/pdf/bets/evolution_payne.pdf
>
> I'd be very interested to hear anyone's responses as to the grammatical
> question.

David,

If you get a response to this from a Hebrew scholar, I have another
question for him based on Payne's article. Payne translates Exodus 20:11
as ...in reference to six days God created...rather than...in six days God
created..., which is how all other translations I have seen translate it.
I looked up the passage to see what preposition the Hebrew used, and found
that there was no preposition. I am wondering how the Hebrew is to be
interpreted in a situation like this where there is no preposition. This
is relevant for Payne's (and ASA member Bob Newman's) theory that Genesis
1 should be interpreted to mean that God's creative acts alternated with
the six nonconsecutive days. The usual translation would seem to be at
odds with this interpretation, but Payne's translation would allow it.

Gordon Brown (ASA member)

To unsubscribe, send a message to majordomo@calvin.edu with
"unsubscribe asa" (no quotes) as the body of the message.
Received on Tue Jan 29 11:57:12 2008