# The Hebrew of Genesis 2:19



## Greg (Oct 7, 2005)

"So out of the ground the LORD God _formed_ every beast of the field and every bird of the heavens and brought them to the man to see what he would call them." -Genesis 2:19

This is from the ESV translation. In the footnotes of the ESV for this passage, the word "formed" is also listed as "had formed". Does the Hebrew word in this context denote something that had already been completed prior? Is this why the footnote in the ESV also has "had formed"? Thanks.


----------



## Scott Bushey (Oct 7, 2005)

H3335
×™×¦×¨
yaÌ‚tsar
yaw-tsar'
probably identical with H3334 (through the squeezing into shape); (compare H3331); to mould into a form; especially as a potter; figuratively to determine (that is, form a resolution): - X earthen, fashion, form, frame, make (-r), potter, purpose.


----------



## Saiph (Oct 7, 2005)

Are you asking if God created new animals for Adam to name, or if they were the previous ones He "had formed" ?




> Moreover, the allusion is not to the creation of all the beasts, but simply to that of the beasts living in the field (game and tame cattle), and of the fowls of the air-to beasts, therefore, *which had been formed like man from the earth,* and thus stood in a closer relation to him than water animals or reptiles. For God brought the animals to Adam, to show him the creatures which were formed to serve him, that He might see what he would call them. Calling or naming presupposes acquaintance. Adam is to become acquainted with the creatures, to learn their relation to him, and by giving them names to prove himself their lord. God does not order him to name them; but by bringing the beasts He gives him an opportunity of developing that intellectual capacity which constitutes his superiority to the animal world. "œThe man sees the animals, and thinks of what they are and how they look; and these thoughts, in themselves already inward words, take the form involuntarily of audible names, which he utters to the beasts, and by which he places the impersonal creatures in the first spiritual relation to himself, the personal being" (Delitzsch).




An interesting side idea is that God formed Adam from the dust of the earth. In John, we see Christ healing a blind man by mixing saliva and dust and anointing His eyes. I like to see that event as Jesus the Creator making NEW EYES for the blind man out of the same dust we all are formed by.

Joh 9:6-7
Having said these things, he spat on the ground and made mud with the saliva. Then he anointed the man's eyes with the mud and said to him, "Go, wash in the pool of Siloam" (which means Sent). So he went and washed and came back seeing.


----------



## turmeric (Oct 7, 2005)

Wow, no wonder the Pharisees were upset and Jesus pointed out their spiritual blindness!


----------



## Scott Bushey (Oct 7, 2005)

> _Originally posted by Saiph_
> Are you asking if God created new animals for Adam to name, or if they were the previous ones He "had formed" ?
> 
> 
> ...



Jesus the apothecarian/doctor/compounder. 

I've always been intrigued by this passage. Christs miracles were generally instantaneous, yet in this case it is not. Most all of the miracles were by touching (either He touching or someone touching Christ); in this case, he mixes mud and spit and the person has to go wash. This is how modern day _compounders_ work.


----------



## Saiph (Oct 7, 2005)

Scott,

I see this as one of Christ's illustrations to the balance of God's sovereignty, and man's responsibility. He gives us a new heart and then says, "go and wash in the water of my Word."


----------



## Scott Bushey (Oct 7, 2005)

> _Originally posted by Saiph_
> Scott,
> 
> I see this as one of Christ's illustrations to the balance of God's sovereignty, and man's responsibility. He gives us a new heart and then says, "go and wash in the water of my Word."



It's a practical _ordo_; regenerated w/ mud and converted w/ the word!


----------



## fredtgreco (Oct 7, 2005)

> _Originally posted by Greg_
> "So out of the ground the LORD God _formed_ every beast of the field and every bird of the heavens and brought them to the man to see what he would call them." -Genesis 2:19
> 
> This is from the ESV translation. In the footnotes of the ESV for this passage, the word "formed" is also listed as "had formed". Does the Hebrew word in this context denote something that had already been completed prior? Is this why the footnote in the ESV also has "had formed"? Thanks.



Greg,

there is nothing inherent in the Hebrew to speak to this issue. The verb is a simple Qal stem perfect. That is most often used for a simple past tense _"he formed,"_ but could be used for a pluperfect tense _"he had formed,"_ and even on occasion a present tense _"he forms."_

I think that is why the ESV has the note; both translatons are grammatical possibilities.


----------



## Greg (Oct 7, 2005)

> _Originally posted by Saiph_
> Are you asking if God created new animals for Adam to name, or if they were the previous ones He "had formed" ?



Hi Mark,

Yes, that is why I'm asking. I was recently having a discussion with someone who doesn't have a favorable view toward the inspiration of Scripture. They were using this passage to support their view that the creation accounts between Gen 1 & 2 are contradictory with the account in Gen. 2 showing that man was created before the animals, whereas Gen. 1 has it the other way around, thus Scripture is truly not inspired of God. Of course I disagreed with him. But I was just curious if there was any indication in the Hebrew word there for "formed" in Gen 2:19 as to whether or not it was referring to the animals God had previously created in Gen. 1:24.

[Edited on 10-7-2005 by Greg]


----------



## Saiph (Oct 7, 2005)

Either way Greg, it would still not be a contradiction.

The two options would be:

God made animals.
God made man.
God made more animals, and brought them to Adam for taxonomy.

OR

God made animals.
God made man.
God brought the previously formed animals, to Adam for taxonomy.

I personally believe the second one to be accurate, however, the NIC commentary by Victor Hamilton implies the first outline by my reading. Here is a quote:




> In one (1:24-25) animals precede man. In the other (2:19) animals come after man. It is possible to translate formed as "had formed" (so NIV). One can, however, retain the traditional translation and still avoid a contradiction. This verse does not imply that this was God's first creation of animals. Rather, it refers to the creation of a special group of animals brought before Adam for naming.
> 
> The Book of Genesis (New International Commentary on the Old Testament Series) Genesis 1-17 - page 176
> by Victor P. Hamilton



[Edited on 10-7-2005 by Saiph]


----------



## turmeric (Oct 7, 2005)

> _Originally posted by Scott Bushey_
> 
> 
> > _Originally posted by Saiph_
> ...



And baptised!


----------

