Page:A critical and exegetical commentary on Genesis (1910).djvu/125

 day, is now replaced by land and sea in their present configuration. The expressions used: gathered together appear—seem to imply that the earth already existed as a solid mass covered with water, as in Ps. 104$5. 6$; but Di. thinks the language not inconsistent with the idea of a muddy mixture of earth and water, as is most naturally suggested by v.$2$. Henceforth the only remains of the original chaos are the subterranean waters (commonly called Tĕhôm, but in Ps. 24$2$ 'sea' and 'streams'), and the circumfluent ocean on which the heaven rests (Jb. 26$10$, Ps. 139$9$, Pr. 8$27$), of which, however, earthly seas are parts.

We.'s argument, that vv.$6-10$ are the account of a single work (above, p. 9 f.), is partly anticipated by IEz., who points out that what is here described is no true creation, but only a manifestation of what was before hidden and a gathering of what was dispersed. On the ground that earth and heaven were made on one day (2$4$), he is driven to take as plup., and assign vv.$9. 10$ to the second day. Some such idea may have dictated the omission of the formula of approval at the close of the second day's work.

11-13. Fourth work: Creation of plants.—The appearing of the earth is followed on the same day, not inappropriately, by the origination of vegetable life. The earth itself is conceived as endowed with productive power—a recognition of the principle of development not to be explained as a mere imparting of the power of annual renewal (Di.); see to the contrary v.$12$ compared with v.$24$.—11. Let the earth produce verdure] means 'fresh young herbage,' and appears here to include all plants in

Gn. 49$13$, Dt. 33$19$, Ps. 46$3f.$ [where it is construed as sing.] 24$2$ etc.) is mostly poetic and late prose; it is probably not numerical, but pl. of extension like, , and therefore to be rendered as sg.

11. ] lit. 'vegetate vegetation,' the noun being acc. cognate with the vb.— is 🇬🇷.; on the pointing with Metheg (Baer-De. p. 74) see Kön. i. § 42, 7. S must have read  as v.$12$.—] G (🇬🇷) and V treat the words as in annexion, contrary to the accents and the usage of the terms. It is impossible to define them with scientific precision; and the twofold classification given above—herb and tree—is more or less precarious. It recurs, however, in Ex. 9$25$ 10$12. 15$ (all J), and the reasons for rejecting the other are, first,