THE HEBREW CLEARLY PROVES THAT THE “MAN” AT
GENESIS 1:27 IS THE SAME “MAN” AS THAT OF GENESIS 2:7, 8
"ADAM" IN THE HEBREW IN GENESIS
The following are both the Hebrew from Bible Works “WTT, BHS Hebrew Old Testament”, [4th edition], and the English from the KJV which clearly proves (not merely suggests) that the “man” (Adam) of Genesis 1:27 is the same “man” (Adam) of Genesis 2:7-8 and the other verses presented here:
27 ויברא אלהים את-האדם בצלמו בצלם אלהים ברא אתו זכר ונקבה ברא אתם
27 So God created man in his own image, in the image of God created he him; male and female created he them.
וייצר יהוה אלהים את-האדם עפר מן-האדמה ויפח באפיו נשמת חיים 7 ויהי האדם לנפש חיה
ויטע יהוה אלהים גן-בעדן מקדם וישם שם את-האדם אשר יצר 8
7 And the LORD God formed man of the dust of the ground, and breathed into his nostrils the breath of life; and man became a living soul.
8 And the LORD God planted a garden eastward in Eden; and there he put the man whom he had formed.
15 ויקח יהוה אלהים את-האדם וינחהו בגן-עדן לעבדה ולשמרה
15 And the LORD God took the man, and put him into the garden of Eden to dress it and to keep it.
24 ויגרש את-האדם וישכן מקדם לגן-עדן את-הכרבים ואת להט החרב המתהפכת לשמר את-דרך עץ החיים
24 So he drove out the man; and he placed at the east of the garden of Eden Cherubims, and a flaming sword which turned every way, to keep the way of the tree of life.
וינחם יהוה כי-עשה את-האדם בארץ ויתעצב אל-לבו 6
ויאמר יהוה אמחה את-האדם אשר-בראתי מעל פני האדמה מאדם עד-בהמה 7 עד-רמש ועד-עוף השמים כי נחמתי כי עשיתם
6 And it repented the LORD that he had made man on the earth, and it grieved him at his heart.
7 And the LORD said, I will destroy man whom I have created from the face of the earth; both man, and beast, and the creeping thing, and the fowls of the air; for it repenteth me that I have made them.
6 שפך דם האדם באדם דמו ישפך כי בצלם אלהים עשה את-האדם
6 Whoso sheddeth man's blood, by man shall his blood be shed: for in the image of God made he man.
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
Some try to cite the Strong’s Concordance Hebrew #120 to prove that the man at Gen. 1:27 and 2:6-7 are not the same man along with other ridiculous arguments. Strong’s states the following for #H120:
“120 אדם; âdâm, aw-dawm; from 119; ruddy, i.e. a human being (an individual or the species, mankind, etc.):– X another, + hypocrite + common sort, X low, man (meaning, of low degree), person.”
When citing this passage by Strong, they will point out “another”, “common sort”, “low, man (meaning, of low degree), person.”
Had they read Strong’s “SIGNS EMPLOYED” at the front of Strong’s Hebrew And Chaldee Dictionary, they might have realized that everything after “:–” is only some of the renderings by the KJV, and one needs to find those passages to understand the context. Strong’s definition of all the Hebrew and Greek words are previous to “:–”.
“+ (addition) denotes a rendering in the A.V. of one or more Hebrew words in connection with the one under consideration.
“X (multiplication) denotes a rendering in the A.V. that results from an idiom peculiar to the Hebrew.
“° (degree) appended to a Hebrew word denotes a vowel pointing corrected from that of the text. (This mark is set in Hebrew Bibles over syllables in which the vowels of the margin have been inserted instead of those properly belonging to the text.
“( ) (parenthesis) in the renderings from the A.V., denotes a word or syllable sometimes given in connection with the principal word to which it is annexed.
“[ ] (brackets), in the rendering from the A.V., denotes the inclusion of an additional word in the Hebrew.
“Italics, at the end of a rendering from the A.V., denotes an explanation of the variations from the usual form.”
So one can clearly see that “… X another, + hypocrite + common sort, X low, man (meaning, of low degree), person” is definitely not part of Strong’s definition. These are only terms that the KJV translators chose to use, (rightly or wrongly).
For instance, for the rendering of “another”, all we need to do is go to Jeremiah 32:20 where it says: “Which hast set signs and wonders in the land of Egypt, even unto this day, and in Israel, and among other men; and hast made thee a name, as at this day;” Notice that the KJV translators have added “other” in italics. Jeremiah was not speaking about blacks or mongolians here! The Strong’s number for “men” at this verse is 120, so it can only be speaking of White Adamic men! It is clear, with this instance, that we better stick with Strong’s definition of ruddy rather than the KJV rendering.
On the words “common sort” we find them in the KJV at Ezek. 23:42 thusly: “And a voice of a multitude being at ease was with her: and with the men of the common sort were brought Sabeans from the wilderness, which put bracelets upon their hands, and beautiful crowns upon their heads.” The words here “common sort” are #’s 7230 and 120, thus White men, but not necessarily under the covenant of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob, as they were “Sabeans”. So even White men not under the covenant were considered as a “common sort”.
You can see from this that we have to be careful how we use the Strong’s Concordance!
MORE ON THE HEBREW NAME,
Not being familiar with the true nature of the Hebrew language, some resort to developing his own arbitrary translations from the Strong’s Hebrew & Chaldee Dictionary by picking and choosing at random whichever Strong’s Hebrew number that supports his defective supposition. Let’s first examine what the Hebrew really says.
To demonstrate that the “man” at Gen. 1:27 and the “man” at Gen. 2:7 are the same person, they are both derived from the same identical Hebrew word
Therefore to separate these two passages as being two separate creations has absolutely no foundation whatsoever! Not only is this same particular Hebrew word used here, but it is also used at Gen. 2:8; 2:15; 3:24; 6:6, 7; 9:6; Deut. 5:24; 2 Chron. 6:18; Ecc. 7:29; Isa. 6:12; Jer. 27:5 Zep. 1:3 & Zech. 11:6. Let’s now break this Hebrew word “את-האדם,” down into its component parts, reversing its order from right to left to left to right:
IS REVERSED TO
את = eth, - = MAQAF, ה = ha, אדם = adam
This is what is known as a “noun common masculine singular absolute”, according to the electronic program “Bible Works”. Each one of these component parts of this Hebrew word is very important to fully understand the meaning of the noun (or name). Let’s now consider each one of these elements of this noun in their proper order:
את = eth
This is #853 in the Strong’s Concordance, thus:
“853. את ’êth, ayth; apparently contracted from 226 in the demonstrative sense of entity; properly self (but generally used to point out more definitely the object of a verb or preposition, even or namely):– [as such unrepresented in English.]”
As we can see, ’êth simply is used to point out more definitely the object of a verb or preposition. To get a better concept of the Hebrew word ’êth, let’s go to Strong’s #226:
“226. אות ’ôwth th; probably from 225 (in the sense of appearing); a signal (literal or figurative), as a flag, beacon, monument, omen, prodigy, evidence, etc.:– mark, miracle, (en-) sign, token.”
The Enhanced Strong’s Lexicon in the Libronix Digital Library states in part on #226: “... 79 occurrences; AV translates as ‘sign(s)’ 60 times, ‘token(s)’ 14 times, ‘ensign(s)’ twice, ‘miracles’ twice, and ‘mark’ once. 1 sign, signal. 1a a distinguishing mark. 1b banner. 1c remembrance. 1d miraculous sign. 1e omen. 1f warning. 2 token, ensign, standard, miracle, proof.” I only included this data on Strong’s #226, for Strong’s #853 stated that it was “... apparently contracted from 226 in the demonstrative sense of entity ...”
This dissertation on the word ’êth has been given for those who are unfamiliar with the Hebrew language and are unaware that it exists. Inasmuch as it is used in conjunction with the term “man”, articulated as “adam” at both Gen. 1:27 & 2:7, as presented here, its use should be taken into account. The word ’êth, is used 689 times in the book of Genesis alone, and a grand total of 7302 times in the entire Old Testament! The problem is, I am not aware that there are any interlinear Bibles, or other Bibles with the Strong’s numbers above each word which designate where the occurrences of ’êth (#853) are. The only source which I know of that one can find this information is on the Internet at:
There are only two other ways by which one can find such information: (1) learn to read the Hebrew and recognize each ’êth when it is seen, or (2) use an electronic Bible program such as Bible Works. For those who don’t have a computer or an electronic program such as Bible works, I will describe how this can be done, hoping that it won’t be too boring, but can be verified by those having this program:
One would go to WTT Hebrew Old Testament at Gen. 1:27 and place the cursor on each Hebrew word, and when it displays “n.m. man, mankind” one will know one has the right word. It is the same word as enlarged and displayed in this document. Then by placing the cursor on various parts of the word, one can recognize (1) the particle ’êth, (2) the particle article “ha”, and (3) “adam” in the Hebrew. Then one can go one step farther by highlighting the entire Hebrew word and right-click, and a box will open, and then select “string search”, and every time that same word appears with the same parts of speech, each occurrence will be listed along the side. When selecting one of the passages that Hebrew word will light up in red. Then if one only wants to isolate the particle ’êth, just highlight that part of the word and right-click and one can find every time that it is used in the Old Testament, again lighting up in red wherever it is to be found.
My motive for explaining the use of electronic data in Bible programs is so that all of those people out there who are dreaming up new ways to twist the Scripture will become aware that they need do some serious study before they put their proverbial foot in their mouth.
There is another electronic source called E-sword which shows only part of the particle ’êth (#853) Hebrew words, and therefore cannot be trusted by the serious Bible student, and I don’t recommend it for this purpose, but it has it right on Gen. 1:27 thusly:
“So God<430] created<1254] [853>man<120] in his own image,<6754] in the image<6754] of God<430] created<1254] he him; male<2145] and female<5347] created<1254] he them.” Notice #853 here!
It should now be evident that attempting to make an assessment on Old Testament passages without first knowing about the Hebrew ta, (#853, ’êth), and other such particles, could be hazardous.
- = MAQAF
We will now address what is known as the “MAQAF”. The symbol which is called MAQAF “-” is the equivalent of a hyphen for ancient Hebrew. Just like the hyphen in English, the MAQAF in Hebrew is used to connect two words. To give you an illustration in English, I often write of a “Canaanite-jew”. In doing so I’m showing a connection between the Canaanites of the Bible and a minor few of the Judahites who had mixed racially with the Canaanites. In other words, since these half-breed Canaanite-Judahites have something in common to both the Judahites and the Canaanites, I simply use a hyphen “-” to identify them as both Canaanite and jew, or “Canaanite-jews”.
In Strong’s Dictionary of The Hebrew Bible under “Hebrew Articulation”, he says: “5. The Maqqêph´ (-), like a hyphen, unites words only for purposes of pronunciation (by removing the primary accent from all except the last of them), but does not affect their meaning or their grammatical construction.” Yes, it would not affect the meaning of their individual grammatical construction, but surely the (-) denotes some sort of interrelationship between the two words! If Strong is correct here, it would place the accent on “adam” rather than “ha”, or ha adam´. This would make adam´ very important, and at Gen. 1:27 & 2:7 it does indeed articulate as “adam´”!
ה = ha
Next to be addressed is what is known as the “particle article” (“h'¥”). In order to understand the importance of an article in grammar, it would be well to review the use of the article in English.
Sadly, some are lacking knowledge of the importance of the part of speech called the article. In Practical English, chapter 2, entitled “The Parts Of Speech II”, page 6, we find a definition for what articles consist of in English: “The words a, an, and the are adjectives, although in grammar they are called articles. The word the is called the definite article. The words a and an are called the indefinite articles. When we say ‘the book on the table’, we are pointing out a particular book on a particular table. When we say, ‘I have a book’, no specific or particular book is indicated.”
Surely, most of you who are reading this paper and remember your English classes in school know that this description of the English definite and indefinite articles are correct. Upon realizing this, you will immediately be wary once you observe people making such an error. Like the English definite article, both the Hebrew and Greek articles modify the subject to a noun.
The Reader’s Digest Great Encyclopedic Dictionary, page 1933, has this to say about what an article is: “article A special form of adjective. ‘The’ is called the definite article. ‘A’ and ‘an’ are indefinite articles.”
The Encyclopedia Americana, 1948 edition, volume 1, page 357, says this of the Article: “Article, in grammar, a part of speech used before nouns to limit or define their application. In the English language a or an is the indefinite article (the latter form being used before a vowel sound) and the the definite article. The English indefinite article is really a modified form of the numeral adjective one; so the German ein and the French un stand for the numeral and the article. There are traces in various languages showing that the definite article was originally a pronoun; thus the English the is closely akin to both this and that. The Latin language has neither the definite nor the indefinite article; the Greek has the definite; the Hebrew and Arabic definite article was prefixed to its noun, while on the other hand, in the Syriac and Chaldee it was affixed to the noun, as it is in the Icelandic. In the Scandinavian language the definite article is appended to the end of the word as hus-et, the house. There is no article in Russian.”
Why is it so necessary to stress the use of the article when we study the Scriptures? For one reason, if we don’t know about the use of the article, whether it is present or absent, we cannot know what the Scriptures are saying. Not only do we have to know what the article means in English, but we have to understand the article in Hebrew and Greek. With the definite article, the Scriptures are speaking of a genuine person: [’êth]-[ha adam´]! In Strong’s Dictionary of The Hebrew Bible under “Hebrew Articulation”, and reversing the order to right to left, we have the same identical Hebrew for the “man” of both Gen. 1:27 & 2:7 as follows:
א = aw´lef, ד = daw´-leth, ם = mame
How anyone gets something other than “Adam” out of this, I’ll never know! But, add the Hebrew ’êth and the Hebrew Article to this, and it becomes an absolute! How can anyone argue that the “man” at Gen. 1:27 is a different person than the “man” at Gen. 2:7, when it’s the same identical Hebrew word with the same identical parts of speech, and at both places with the ’êth and Article? But I guess anything goes when one becomes a pretzel twister!
We have now covered all of the elements making up the Hebrew word for Adam at both Gen. 1:27 and 2:7, 8, and I have given you in this paper the 13 other places in the Old Testament that the same identical word occurs.
Gen. 1:27: “So God created man
in his own image, in the image of God created he him; male and female created he them.”
Gen. 2:7-8: “7 And Yahweh singular-Elohim formed man
of the dust of the ground, and breathed into his nostrils the breath of life; and man
became a living soul. 8 And Yahweh singular-Elohim planted a garden eastward in Eden; and there he put the man
whom he had formed.”
Gen. 3:24: “So he drove out the man
and he placed at the east of the garden of Eden Cherubims, and a flaming sword which turned every way, to keep the way of the tree of life.”
Gen. 6:6-7: “6 And it repented Yahweh that he had made man
on the earth, and it grieved him at his heart. 7 And Yahweh said, I will destroy man
whom I have created from the face of the earth; both man
and beast, and the creeping thing, and the fowls of the air; for it repenteth me that I have made them.”
Gen. 9:6: “Whoso sheddeth man’s
blood, by man
shall his blood be shed: for in the image of god made He man
A paraphrase of Gen. 9:6 might go something like this: “Whoso sheddeth [HA ADAM´]’s blood(DAM), by [ADAM] shall his blood(DAM) be shed, for in the image of God made He [’ETH-HA ADAM´].” It is interesting to note here that the last two letters of Adam’s name are the same Hebrew characters that articulate as “dam”, blood
CONCLUSION: THE THEORY ASSERTING THAT GENESIS 1:27 IS A RECORD OF THE CREATION OF THE NON-ADAMIC RACES IS PURE FICTION!
Clifton A. Emahiser