Page:A critical and exegetical commentary on Genesis (1910).djvu/122

 (the possibility of failure, happily overcome). But he rightly calls attention to the bright view of the world implied in the series of approving verdicts, as opposed to the pessimistic estimate which became common in later Judaism.—And God divided, etc.] To us these words merely suggest alternation in time; but Heb. conceives of a spatial distinction of light and darkness, each in its own 'place' or abode (Jb. 38$19f.$). Even the separate days and nights of the year seem thought of as having independent and continuous existence (Jb. 3$6$).

The Heb. mind had thus no difficulty in thinking of the existence of light before the heavenly bodies. The sun and moon rule the day and night, but light and darkness exist independently of them. It is a mistake, however, to compare this with the scientific hypothesis of a cosmical light diffused through the nebula from which the solar system was evolved. It is not merely light and darkness, but day and night, and even the alternation of evening and morning (v.$5$), that are represented as existing before the creation of the sun.

5. And God called, etc.] The name—that by which the thing is summoned into the field of thought—belongs to the full existence of the thing itself. So in the first line of the Babylonian account, "the heaven was not yet named" means that it did not yet exist.—And it became evening, etc.] Simple as the words are, the sentence presents some difficulty, which is not removed by the supposition that the writer follows the Jewish custom of reckoning the day from

with attracted obj.: see G-K. § 117 h; Dav. § 146.—5. in popular parlance denotes the period between dawn and dark, and is so used in $5a$. When it became necessary to deal with the 24-hours' day, it was most natural to connect the night with the preceding period of light, reckoning, i.e., from sunrise to sunrise; and this is the prevailing usage of OT. In post-exilic times we find traces of the reckoning from sunset to sunset in the phrase (🇬🇷), Is. 27$3$ 34$10$, Est. 4$16$. P regularly employs the form 'day and night'; and if Lv. 23$32$ can be cited as a case of the later reckoning, Ex. 12$18$ is as clearly in favour of the older (see Marti, EB, 1036; König, ZDMG, lx. 605 ff.). There is therefore no presumption in favour of the less natural method in this passage.—] Mil'el, to avoid concurrence of two accented syll.—] (also Mil'el) a reduplicated form (cf. Aram. ): see Nöldeke, ''Mand. Gr. § 109; Prätorius, ZATW'', iii. 218; Kön. ii. § 52 c.—] 'a first day,' or perhaps better 'one day.' On as ord. see G-K. §§ 98 a, 134 p; Dav. § 38, R. 1; but cf. Wellh. Prol.$6$ 387.