The Genesis Account

[n2thelight]

Appendixes to The Companion Bible

14. THE SYNONYMOUS WORDS USED FOR "MAN".
There are four principal Hebrew words rendered "man", and these must be carefully discriminated. Every occurrence is noted in the margin of The Companion Bible. They represent him from four different points of view :--
1. 'Adam, denotes his origin, as being made from the "dust of the Adamah" ground (Lat. homo).
2. 'Ish, has regard to sex, a male (Lat. vir).
3. 'Enosh, has regard to his infirmities, as physically mortal, and as to character, incurable.
4. Geber, has respect to his strength, a mighty man.


I. 'Adam, without the article, denotes man or mankind in general (Gen. 1:26; 2:5; 5:1, followed by plural pronoun). With the article, it denotes the man, Adam, though rendered "man" in Gen. 1:27; 2:7 (twice), 8, 15, 16, 19 (marg.), 22 (twice); 3:12, 22, 24; 5:1; 6:1 (rendered "men"), 2, 3, 4. After this, the Hebrew 'Adam = man or men, is used of the descendants of Adam. Hence, Christ is called "the son of Adam", not a son of Enosh.

With the particle ha ('eth) in addition to the article it is very emphatic, and means self, very, this same, this very. See Gen. 2:7 (first occurrence), 8, 15.

Rendered in the Septuagint anqrwpos (anthropos) 411 times; ajnhvr (aner) eighteen times (fifteen times in Proverbs); brotovs (brotos), mortal (all in Job); once ghgehvs (gegenes), earth-born, Jer. 32:20.

II. 'Ish. First occurrence in feminine, Gen. 2:23, 'ishah = woman. Therefore, 'ish = male, or husband; a man, in contrast with a woman. A great man in contrast with ordinary men (Ps. 49:2, where "low" are called the children of Adam, and the "high" = children of 'ish. So Ps. 62:9 and Isa. 2:9; 5:15; 31:8). When God is spoken of as man, it is 'ish (Ex. 15:3. So Josh. 5:13. Dan. 9:21; 10:5; 12:6, 7. Zech. 1:8, &c.). Also, in such expressions as "man of God", "man of understanding", &c. In the early chapters of Genesis we have it in chapters 3:33, 34 and 4:1.
Translated in Septuagint 1,083 times by ajnhvr (aner), Latin vir, and only 450 by anqrwpos (anthropos), Latin homo.
It is rendered "husband" sixty-nine times, "person" twelve times, and once or twice each in thirty-nine different ways.

III. 'Enosh. First occurrence Gen. 6:4, men of name. Always in a bad sense (Isa. 5:22; 45:14. Judg. 18:25). Morally = depraved, and physically = frail, weak. It is from 'anash, to be sick, wretched, weak, and denotes inability, for strength, physically; and for good, morally (cp. 2Sam. 12:15. Job 34:6. Jer. 15:18; 17:9; 30:12, 15. Mic. 1:9). Note the contrasts, Isa. 2:11 and 17, "The lofty looks of man ('Adam) shall be humbled, and the haughtiness of men ('Enosh) shall be bowed down" (Cp. Isa. 13:12. Job 25:6. Ps. 8:4; 90:3; 144:3. Job 4:17; 10:5; 7:17. Dan. 4:16). Other instructive passages are Isa. 8:1; 66:24. Ezek. 24:17 (afflicted, or mourners. Cp. Jer. 17:16, "day of man"). In 1Sam. 4:9 it is probably plural of 'Ish (so probably Gen. 18 and 19, where the indefinite plural must be interpreted by the context, because 'Adam would have denoted human, and 'Ish, males).
It is rendered "man" 518 times, "certain" eleven times, and once or twice each in twenty-four other and different ways.

IV. Geber. First occurrence in Gen. 6:4 (*1), mighty men, and denotes man in respect of his physical strength, as 'Enosh does in respect of the depravity of his nature. It is rendered "man" sixty-seven times, "mighty" twice, "man-child" once, "every one" once. In the Septuagint rendered fourteen times anqrwpos (anthropos) and the rest by ajnhvr (aner).

For illustrative passages see Ex. 10:11; 12:37. 1Sam. 16:18. 2Sam. 23:1. Num. 24:3, 15. 1Chron. 26:12; 28:1. 2Chron. 13:3. Ezra 4:21; 5:4, 10; 6:8.
V. Methim (plural) = adults as distinguished from children, and males as distinguished from females. Occurs Gen. 34:30. Deut. 2:34; 3:6; 4:27; 26:5; 28:62; 33:6. 1Chron. 16:19. Job 11:3, 11; 19:19; 22:15; 24:12; 31:31. Ps. 17:14; 26:4; 105:12. Isa. 3:25; 5:13; 41:14. Jer. 44:28.

(*1) In Gen. 6:4, we have three out of the above four words : "daughters of men" ( = daughters of [the man] 'Adam; "mighty men" = (geber); "men of renown" = Heb. men ('Enosh) of name, i.e. renowned for their moral depravity.

 

[n2thelight]

'We'? So what about you?

Im in the we as well

 

[handy]

Do we actually believe that all the different races came from two people?I know with God all things are possible,but I also think He does that which is natural.........Kind after kind......

Yes, I do believe all "races" came from two people....

There is only one "race", n2thelight, the human race. Skin pigmentation, hair color, eye color, facial characteristics...all a matter of simple genetics. Sheesh, it's not as if we're comparing apples to oranges... A white man and a black man are about as different as a red delicious apple and a granny smith apple. Probably even less so on a genetic level.

 

[handy]

Genesis 1:11 "And God said, "Let the earth bring forth grass, the herb yielding seed, and the fruit tree yielding fruit after his kind, whose seed is in itself, upon the earth:" and it was so."

Genesis 1:12 "And the earth brought forth grass, and herb yielding seed after his kind, and the tree yielding fruit, whose seed was in itself, after his kind: and God saw that it was good."

Genesis 1:29 "And God said, "Behold, I have given you every herb bearing seed, which is upon the face of all the earth, and every tree, in the which is the fruit of a tree yielding seed; to you it shall be for meat."

Right, but as Genesis 2:5 states: "Now no shrub of the field was yet in the earth, and no plant of the field had yet sprouted, for the LORD God had not sent rain upon the earth, and there was no man to cultivate the ground." Hence the Garden... a place for God's animals and men to live until the created plants, trees and shrubs had time to mature and start yielding fruit.

This is where Genesis is quite different than the many Sunday School stories of creation that those who were raised Christian heard. In the Sunday School books when God said, ""Let the earth bring forth grass, the herb yielding seed, and the fruit tree yielding fruit after his kind, whose seed is in itself, upon the earth", the story book pictures show mature trees, laden with fruit, tall grasses, wheat ready to be harvested. Genesis tells us that this isn't so. The young plants and saplings were there, but not mature enough to support life yet, so God made the Garden.

 

[handy]

Just as an illustration, I once spent about three days planting a garden with my son. We planted all kinds of veggies, plus corn (a grass) and some strawberries. The plants were all there, they were real, they were living...but we never got to eat any of it because the cows broke through the fence one day and ate all the plants before the fruit of the plant (the edible parts) were ripe enough to eat.

This is the clearest and simplest reconciliation between Genesis 1 and Genesis 2:5.

In biblical exegesis, we can't simply ignore certain texts because they don't fit in with the theory. The idea that the plants were there, just not mature enough to eat is simple and yet easily explains the apparent discrepancy.

I think day six was a pretty special "day" (I don't necessarily think the days were 24 hours long). The earth and everything was in place, but I think it was still a very wild, even dangerous place... good, but not necessarily a good place for men and animals. So, God planted the Garden for Adam and the animals, and then, in a special act to emphasize the special relationship between a man and wife, God created Eve.

 

[felix]

This is the clearest and simplest reconciliation between Genesis 1 and Genesis 2:5

Actually, Gen 1 is overview of creation and Gen 2 details it further just like Gen 10 and 11. Gen 10 gives the table of nations and finishes by saying they are scattered. Then Gen 11 starts by Nimrod and Babel.

 

[handy]

I agree, Felix. Somewhere, years ago, I read in some commentary that Genesis 1 was actually a song in oral form. Doesn't make it not true, just very poetic and stylized. But, Genesis 2 (and subsequent chapters) provides the greater details.

 

[Osgiliath]

Do we actually believe that all the different races came from two people?I know with God all things are possible,but I also think He does that which is natural.........Kind after kind......

They must have come from two people, or Paul would never have said:

1 Corinthians 15:22 "For as IN ADAM ALL die, even so in Christ shall ALL be made alive."

 

[Grazer]

They must have come from two people, or Paul would never have said:

1 Corinthians 15:22 "For as IN ADAM ALL die, even so in Christ shall ALL be made alive."

Assuming Paul was being literal. He probably was since he certainly believed Adam was a real historical figure but that doesn't mean he was right.

Sent from my HTC Desire S using Tapatalk 2

 

[Osgiliath]

Assuming Paul was being literal. He probably was since he certainly believed Adam was a real historical figure but that doesn't mean he was right.

Whether or not Paul was historically right is beyond my ability to confirm. The 1. the Word of God and 2. the Holy Spirit (the Two Witnesses) are who I look to for answers to my questions. They may not suffice for others, but for me they are more than sufficient. Can I "prove" with concrete evidence that Paul was right? No. But I have faith that he was right. Getting into the business of hypothesizing whether or not various parts of the written Word are accurate is NOT something I plan to do in this lifetime. I personally believe the written Word (properly translated) is 100% accurate. Others may disagree, which is fine with me. ;)

 

[handy]

Whether or not Paul was historically right is beyond my ability to confirm. The 1. the Word of God and 2. the Holy Spirit (the Two Witnesses) are who I look to for answers to my questions. They may not suffice for others, but for me they are more than sufficient. Can I "prove" with concrete evidence that Paul was right? No. But I have faith that he was right. Getting into the business of hypothesizing whether or not various parts of the written Word are accurate is NOT something I plan to do in this lifetime. I personally believe the written Word (properly translated) is 100% accurate. Others may disagree, which is fine with me. ;)

I don't necessarily agree with all your interpretations, Osgiliath, but I do agree fully with this.

 

[Vanguard]

They must have come from two people, or Paul would never have said:

1 Corinthians 15:22 "For as IN ADAM ALL die, even so in Christ shall ALL be made alive."

That might be one way of looking at it, but then you take the position of post hoc, ergo propter hoc. Another way of interpreting it is "just like Adam, everyone dies, but through Christ everyone shall live [in heaven]." All it means is that everyone will experience a physical death, but those saved by Jesus will experience a spiritual re-birth. This latter translation does not prove anything about earth's population. As with everything in the Bible, it is subject to interpretation.

 

[VirginShallConceive]

Assuming Paul was being literal. He probably was since he certainly believed Adam was a real historical figure but that doesn't mean he was right.

Do you believe that Adam was a real historical figure in the genealogy of Jesus?

 

[Grazer]

Do you believe that Adam was a real historical figure in the genealogy of Jesus?

I'm undecided on that at the moment but it doesn't matter to me whether he was or not.

Sent from my HTC Desire S using Tapatalk 2

 

[farouk]

Do you believe that Adam was a real historical figure in the genealogy of Jesus?

Does Grazer really think that Adam was some sort of aggregate of apes and someone's imagination? I don't know what he means by Adam not being an historical figure.

 

[farouk]

I'm undecided on that at the moment but it doesn't matter to me whether he was or not.

Sent from my HTC Desire S using Tapatalk 2

According to 1 Corinthians 15.22, it does matter a lot, actually.

 

[VirginShallConceive]

I'm undecided on that at the moment but it doesn't matter to me whether he was or not.

Thanks for your quick and honest answer. I agree. Some conclusions are easy to come to. Some are not. Some we thought we knew for sure, and then we realize we really didn't know. Wisdom comes with age, I guess. :dunno

 

[Grazer]

According to 1 Corinthians 15.22, it does matter a lot, actually.

Paul bringing in Adam does raise some questions about genesis but as I've put elsewhere, I don't need Adam to be an historical figure to understand sin and that I need help.

If I can use an analogy; if I wake up tomorrow at the bottom of a cliff with 2 broken legs and a piece of wood coming out my stomach, I don't need to know how I got there to know I need help.

Adam can be literal or not and I think Paul's message still works either way.

Sent from my HTC Desire S using Tapatalk 2

 

[Shannon H]

Re: The Genesis Account
Quote Originally Posted by wayseer View Post
You are trying to take the story of Genesis literally. As a result, you will run into any number of problems.

I don't take it literally. If anything, I am the open minded one that is willing to think outside of the box, and look at the bigger picture. I was just interested in the views of others.

Ye do err,

Matt 22:29 Jesus answered and said unto them, Ye do err, not knowing the scriptures, nor the power of God.

There are many references throughout the New Testament to Genesis, accepting it as literal history—as truth. There are at least 165 passages in Genesis that are either directly quoted or clearly referred to throughout the New Testament. Included in these are more than 100 quotations or direct reference to Genesis, chapters 1 through 11.
Every one of the New Testament authors refers in his writings to Genesis 1 through 11. Every one of the first 11 chapters is alluded to in certain sections throughout the New Testament. A complete listing of all New Testament references to Genesis can be found in Dr. Henry Morris’ excellent commentary on Genesis, The Genesis Record, co-published by Baker Book House and Creation Life Publishers.
Throughout the Old and New Testament, Genesis is quoted from or referred to more than any other book in the entire Bible. This certainly indicates something of its importance. It also shows that both Old Testament and New Testament writers accepted Genesis as truth. On at least six occasions, Jesus Christ either quoted from or referred to some aspects of Genesis 1 through 11.
from www.answersingenesis.org

 

[Grazer]

Re: The Genesis Account
Quote Originally Posted by wayseer View Post
You are trying to take the story of Genesis literally. As a result, you will run into any number of problems.



Ye do err,

Matt 22:29 Jesus answered and said unto them, Ye do err, not knowing the scriptures, nor the power of God.

There are many references throughout the New Testament to Genesis, accepting it as literal history—as truth. There are at least 165 passages in Genesis that are either directly quoted or clearly referred to throughout the New Testament. Included in these are more than 100 quotations or direct reference to Genesis, chapters 1 through 11.
Every one of the New Testament authors refers in his writings to Genesis 1 through 11. Every one of the first 11 chapters is alluded to in certain sections throughout the New Testament. A complete listing of all New Testament references to Genesis can be found in Dr. Henry Morris’ excellent commentary on Genesis, The Genesis Record, co-published by Baker Book House and Creation Life Publishers.
Throughout the Old and New Testament, Genesis is quoted from or referred to more than any other book in the entire Bible. This certainly indicates something of its importance. It also shows that both Old Testament and New Testament writers accepted Genesis as truth. On at least six occasions, Jesus Christ either quoted from or referred to some aspects of Genesis 1 through 11.
from www.answersingenesis.org

If I recount an event and reference Romeo & Juliet, does that automatically mean I take Romeo and Juliet as historical and true?

No one is questioning the importance of genesis, just how we should treat it.

Sent from my HTC Desire S using Tapatalk 2