3

In what language is the oldest available text of Genesis 1:26-27, and what are that language's words for what is variously translated as "man" or "humankind"?

lpmulligan
  • 31
  • 2
  • 3
    You may want to clarify what you mean by "earliest available text." Do you mean the oldest existing manuscript? Or our best reconstruction of the oldest text? – Noah Aug 15 '14 at 16:43

2 Answers2

3

Two very easy questions.

Question one: the answer is Hebrew.

Question 2: the word used in Gen. 1:26 is אָדָם (ʼādām, “man”); the word in 1:27 is הָאָדָם (hāʼādām “the man”).

fdb
  • 5,300
  • 1
  • 16
  • 23
  • Since Moses wrote the Torah, this question is a no-brainer. However, it's not clear whether there were oral sources or other writings(Book of Enoch?) which were copied from. – Tau Aug 15 '14 at 02:51
  • 2
    Whether or not Moses wrote the Torah is not the issue here. The question is simply about language. – fdb Aug 15 '14 at 13:15
  • It might be a little while before I get to put up an answer, but I'm pretty sure the answer given here to Question one is wrong. The oldest extant Greek text of Gen 1:26-27 is much older (500+ years) than the oldest extant Hebrew text. (Of course, the Greek is translated from even earlier Hebrew texts, but none of those are extant.) – Noah Aug 15 '14 at 13:25
  • 3
    There is a difference between “texts” and “manuscripts”. Nobody doubts, for example, that the text of Plato’s dialogues is from the fourth and fifth centuries BC, although the surviving copies are centuries later. It is correct that the earliest complete copies of the Torah/Pentateuch are of the Greek translation, copied in the 4th century AD, but there are fragments of Genesis, and in fact of all the books of the Old Testament (apart from Esther), in Hebrew, from Qumran, dating from the first century BC, if not earlier. – fdb Aug 15 '14 at 13:49
  • 1
    @fdb: Perhaps the question should be clarified to make that point clearer? At any rate the Qumran manuscripts don't have this particular verse. – Noah Aug 15 '14 at 16:38
  • Could you expand this some more? Perhaps mention which critical text you're using, explain which extant codex/ms is oldest and which the critical text (BHS/Q) is based on, etc.? As it stands, the OP just has to take your word for it - just like every other site on the Internet. – Dan Aug 20 '14 at 16:41
  • Granted, I know this is correct (I've studied Biblical Hebrew/Aramaic), but again, we're looking to be more than your average forum. This is a Q&A site and we have a requirement to show your work, i.e. tell us how you know this, not just what you know (even when it's trivial). – Dan Aug 20 '14 at 16:41
0

This really depends on how you define "Genesis" Many scholars believe that Genesis was sourced from the Enuma Elish which in turn was sourced from the Eridu Genesis. If you consider these first drafts of Genesis, then the answer is Sumerian. The book of Genesis as we have it now is vastly different in terms of meaning and what it is trying to tell us, but still clearly follows the same story line with a different perspective.

James Shewey
  • 7,767
  • 8
  • 58
  • 107
  • 3
    If you would read “Genesis” and “Enuma Elish” you would very quickly notice that these are two completely different books with just a few similarities in the creation story. No way is one the “first draft” of the other. – fdb Aug 16 '14 at 00:46
  • 3
    Only the first chapter of Genesis bears any resemblance to the Enuma Elish, and even there the similarity is mainly structural. If Genesis 1 was derived at all from the Enuma Elish, it was more like a parody than "the same story line with a different perspective". – Bruce Alderman Aug 16 '14 at 05:29
  • Don't forget the flood from the Epic of Atrahasis/Gilgamesh. This gets you several more chapters. While you are right about only the first chapter bearing any resemblance to the aforementioned texts, this question is only about the first chapter of Genesis. – James Shewey Aug 16 '14 at 06:40