Click to join the conversation with over 500,000 Pentecostal believers and scholars
| PentecostalTheology.com
Tips for Street Preaching & Personal Witnessing
Practical application of Pentecostal theology in politics, economy and social issues
Question with regard to dual meanings in the Hebrew words "Erev" and "Boker" in Genesis 1
This is a long and sometimes rambling account of my investigation into the creation account, specifically with regard to the word “Boker” or morning. It is one of the most fascinating concepts I have ever discovered with regard to the Torah and the Hebrew language. The question is, do the ideas contained within hold up to scrutiny?
I happened upon this thought whilst researching the creation account. I don’t know if it’s original or has been discussed before, but if anyone is familiar with this idea, can you point me towards an analysis (if such a thing exists)?
After researching their etymology, the words Erev and Boker (or Voker) seem to have dual meanings, and thus could be used to gain further insight into the text. The commonly accepted literal translation of the phrase “Vayehi erev vayehi voker yom echad” reads “And it was evening and it was morning, one day”.
I was initially interested in the word “boker” and why it has the same root as “bakar” or cattle. This led to me discovering that “boker” fundamentally means “splitting” or “cleaving”.
I was excited but not surprised to find that upon researching the word “Erev” that it held the opposite connotations, ideas of mixture or gathering.
Leaving aside discussion over the word “Yom“, literally meaning day for the moment (I have other theories about that), it is highly interesting to then read the verses in this new light (if you’ll pardon the pun).
“And it was unified, and it was split, day one” obviously makes perfect sense with regard to day one and holds interesting implications for the subsequent days.
The idea that the creation can be reconciled scientifically by a series of “splitting of states” is highly fascinating for me. This also resonates with the idea (as stated in the Shema) of God being “One” – perhaps this reality is just the result of the splitting of that “one” into smaller discrete parts?
Edit: I have recently found an independent version of a similar theory in the book “The Science of God” by Dr. Gerald Schroeder. He describes the same ideas (which he attributes to Nachmanides), but instead relates ‘erev’ to mixture as in disorder or chaos. And to ‘boker’ he ascribes the idea of order (from bikoret-orderly, able to be observed). However he still seems to have missed the fundamental idea of ‘splitting’ which in my opinion is the key to unlocking the whole thing.
So to clarify the question: Has anyone written an analysis of Genesis 1 through the lens of these alternate meanings of ‘erev’ and ‘boker’? Is mine a plausible theory? Why or why not?
Edit 2: I just thought of another key argument which (again very simply but elegantly) supports my claims. In conversation with AbuMunirIbnIbrahim he challenged me on the meaning of בָּקָר, saying there is no evidence of linkage with the idea of splitting or division. I answered him thusly:
“In the case of בָּקַע and בָּקָר, however there is a clear linkage, which is discernible from one key translation of the root word:”בְּקַר: to plough, to break forth, to inspect. The Gesenius Hebrew and Chaldee Lexicon translated by Friedrich Wilhelm states that the word בָּקָר is named for its purpose: of ploughing. This shows an undeniable link. Additionally there is also a second link which is that of the cloven hoof, which is one of the fundamental aspects of Kashrut.”
Coincidentally the other defining feature of a Kosher animal is that it is ruminant, ie. It has a divided or split stomach relative to other mammals. So both aspects of Kashrut involve the idea of splitting or division.
However, his reference to Ezekiel 34:12 really got me thinking…
As a shepherd seeketh out his flock in the day that he is among his sheep that are separated, so will I seek out My sheep; and I will deliver them out of all places whither they have been scattered in the day of clouds and thick darkness.
Look at this verse closely. “his sheep that are separated”. It hit me that this a fundamental characteristic of “בָּקָר” or cattle:- to flock or herd. A single animal from a flock represents the division of a whole into smaller discrete parts. Again this consistent use of language resonates perfectly and works with everything in its context. Sheep separating from the flock. The flock separating from the shepherd. Man separating from God. This verse (intentionally or not) uses the three letter root בקר twice and is directly concerned with the idea of unification (the flock) and divison (the scattering) and the subsequent reunification.
Edit 3: After some more research I am convinced that the two letter root “בק” literally means divide or split. Further, I am starting to think that the two letter root forms a fundamental part of the 3 letter root (which I have now subsequently learned is also a major part of Kabalistic thought). http://www.2letterlookup.com/ is a very useful tool in efficiently searching for patterns in the letter combinations and in the brief time I’ve been using it, I’ve seen some remarkable results.
In addition to the words listed above, I started looking for 3 letter root words with בק at the end (letters 2 and 3). Again I found multiple references to the idea of splitting, but one in particular stood out:
-Abaq (אָבַק or אָבָק) according to Gesenius means “fine dust” or “light particles” His conjecture as to the etymology reads:
“אָבַק a root not used in Kal, which I suppose to have had the force of to pound, to make small, from the onomatopoetic syllable בק, בך, פג, פק, which, as well as דך, דק (see דָּקַק, דָּכַךְ ), had the force of pounding; comp. בָּכָה to drop, to distil;”
The feminine form of the word also means powder. Clearly the idea of dust or powder as small particles removed from a larger whole again demonstrate exactly the same concept.
But this isn’t where it ends- it gets far more interesting. Genesis Chap. 32 recounts the story of Yaakov wrestling with the angel. The story often seems to be making cryptic allusions. First, Yaakov and his family crossed the ford of Yabok (יבק) – a name which appears to be highly symbolic. Then they wrestled (וַיֵּאָבֵק) the etymology again goes back to dust.
However, Rashi has a different interpretation attributing the word to an Aramaic expression found in the Talmud: דָּאִבִיקוּ. This is derivative of the 3 letter root דבק, meaning adhere, glue or impinge. Again the word references the concept of unification and division, since glue binds two discrete objects together.
I realise that this is moving away somewhat from a hermeneutic question, but I think it needs to be discussed. Either way I have realised that the Hebrew language is so much more complex and ingenious than I ever realised.
Varnel Watson
The lost art Joe Absher
Joe Absher
The video is by Ray Comfort. 21 points. It is a practical approach. But not the only one. I’m still looking for the “great words and railing debate” at SOAPA last year. I haven’t looked to hard. It was two hours. Very interesting. If you’re interested in sharing the gospel.
Another good video on street preaching is by Jed Smock “the 5 stages of a crowd.” I’m sure someone has the link. Very interesting and insightful. I think for me it’s all stage one. The battle. But the campus preachers they got stay. Gotta give them that. And Bible.
Roger David
Some of soapas teaching might be half decent but the railing debate one might be a bad idea to point people towards for the how to. Perhaps you can use that one as a “How not to”.
Joe Absher
It’s an important discussion. They were willing discuss these very things. I don’t know anyone that was involved. Maybe God in his mercy will raise up more men that are not ashamed of the Gospel
Varnel Watson
Give us some pointers to watch out for in the video pls
Joe Absher
The last one 21 i don’t like. He says use elevation. Meaning a stool or something to stand on. I just saw a video of someone kicking it out from under a preaching in England. If you’re young and nimble might be ok.
Varnel Watson
yes – Jesse Morrell has a soap box 🙂
Joe Absher
Point four was second best
Aim for repentance not a decision
For me the best was the closing.
Isaiah 42:4 Jesus doesn’t get discouraged
Roger David
The elevation recommendation is a good one. It helps on many levels(pardon the pun).
Joe Absher
Tell me if you can read the notes?
Varnel Watson
is for short ppl 🙂
Joe Absher
Joe Absher
Joe Absher
Joe Absher
Point 1. A blind man can’t see. I think Jesse Morrel calls these the careless sinners.
2. Gospel preaching includes teaching
3. Avoid foolish questions
4. Repentance not decisions
5. Earn the right to witness. I think he means be personable. But he uses the natural man receives not the things of God for a scripture
6. Let God tell them if they’re saved it’s not our place to do so (good point)
7. Never fear hecklers, if handled correctly they can draw a crowd
8. Be careful of using cliches. “Are you saved” etc.
9. Power of distraction. Diverting anger and drunks
10. Pray for Godly descirnment. Don’t align with everyone you meet on the street.
11. Find your level of amplification. How loud is effective for you
Varnel Watson
handwriting is a beautiful thing
Joe Absher
Anyways it’s a good class. For me it’s alot about what’s behind a man that gives him credibility. Two people can say the same thing. Means nothing. your life is your best sermon. So I consider this a gem. Plus he preached up at times square church. No small recommendation.
Joe Absher
Got anymore good videos Mr Day. How come we don’t hear from the evangelists to much? Just seems odd. Ok maybe they’re busy but two years?
I think we had a post from brother Norman and one or two from the church of God missionary. The one we prayed for his eyes? But it’s been kinda slight?
How is young Brody Pope doing?
Varnel Watson
give us the top tips – how many 4-5 or 11-12?
Roger David
I’m all for watching videos and readings books on the top tips on how to but I find too often people will watch YouTube street preacher videos and try and imitate those preachers rather than just getting some pointers then go and learning by doing.
I thank God for a few of those street preacher videos as they do inspire people to get off their pew.
As Jed says…who will rise up?
Varnel Watson
Roger David I take it you didnt like it. Give us some pointers to watch out for in the video – the good, the bad and the ugly