Page 139 - Coincidences in the Bible and in Biblical Hebrew

COINCIDENCES IN THE BIBLE AND IN BIBLICAL HEBREW
118
118 COINCIDENCES IN THE BIBLE AND IN BIBLICAL HEBREW
The root of the name “Earth” was the subject of much debate as reported in
Jewish written sources. The reason for these debates was the fact that the name
“Earth” resembles the Hebrew word for “to run”—namely, “to move fast” (“Earth”
1
is Eretz, and “run” is ratz). Jewish scholars were puzzled about this resemblance
and explained that the reason for it is probably that all stars and the moon and
the sun are “running” around the earth. Rabbi Don Yitzchak Abarbanel (1437–

1508), a well-known commentator of the Bible, did not accept this interpreta-
tion. In his commentary to Genesis (1), he explains that “since the earth is a
still center, it would have been appropriate that the wheel [meaning sun] should
1
be called ‘Eretz,’ and not the still center around which it revolves.” Obviously,
living prior to Copernicus, Jewish sages have tried to fit their interpretations to

the scientific knowledge of their time. Abrabanel rejected their explanations based

on pure logic, unaware that not many years later, Copernicus (1473–1543), in

his book published not long prior to his death, would introduce findings that
resolved this quandary.
10
The source of other synonyms, the sun as chammah (hot) and the moon as
5
levanah (white) are self-explanatory.

8.2 “And God made the two great lights; The great light … and the
small light …” (Gen. 1:16)

A reader of this verse will indeed be baffled. How can such contradictory state-
ments be given in the same chapter, let alone in consecutive sentences, let alone in
the opening chapter of the whole Bible? Either the lights (obviously meaning the
sun and the moon) are both great (large) or they are both small. Stating first that

they are of equal size (great) and then the opposite (one is smaller than the other)

leaves one pondering whether some error had gone undetected in the first most
well-known chapter of Genesis. As one recalls how precise and consistent is bibli-
cal discourse (amply demonstrated in chapter 1), this puzzlement tends to grow.
The seemingly contradictory statements in the above verse from Genesis
become compatible with one another as one recalls that biblical text is often given
layer underneath layer. Such cases are introduced in chapter 16, where various
words in the Bible are introduced, which are differently read than written. It is
then explained that the written word represents the inner meaning of the word,
while the read word represents the visible superficial appearance of the object that

the word stands for.
It is clear that a similar scenario is encountered in this bizarre verse, which

needs clarification. The explanation is straightforward.