Difference of words in Genesis 6:7 and Genesis 6:17












2















Why did Moses used 2 different words in Genesis 6:7 and 17 when writing about the consequences of the Great Flood?



The first one is "machah" meaning "to exterminate". The next one is "shachath" meaning "to ruin".










share|improve this question



























    2















    Why did Moses used 2 different words in Genesis 6:7 and 17 when writing about the consequences of the Great Flood?



    The first one is "machah" meaning "to exterminate". The next one is "shachath" meaning "to ruin".










    share|improve this question

























      2












      2








      2








      Why did Moses used 2 different words in Genesis 6:7 and 17 when writing about the consequences of the Great Flood?



      The first one is "machah" meaning "to exterminate". The next one is "shachath" meaning "to ruin".










      share|improve this question














      Why did Moses used 2 different words in Genesis 6:7 and 17 when writing about the consequences of the Great Flood?



      The first one is "machah" meaning "to exterminate". The next one is "shachath" meaning "to ruin".







      hebrew translation-philosophy context






      share|improve this question













      share|improve this question











      share|improve this question




      share|improve this question










      asked 4 hours ago









      PhilipPhilip

      3389




      3389






















          1 Answer
          1






          active

          oldest

          votes


















          2














          Not a complete annihilation



          The first term refers to an action against man and the animals - exterminating or eradicating the individual creatures currently living. ‘Exterminating’ does not wipe out a species - it only removes the living creatures.



          The second term refers to an action against flesh in general - ruining flesh as a whole. To ‘ruin’ something is also not to permanently remove it, but to take away its ability to function as before.



          The impression I get is of intention:



          Extermination: living creatures not species



          While God sought to eradicate the actual, individual creatures that were currently living, He had no intention of eliminating any species in general.



          This is demonstrated by the ark, which protected one breeding pair of each species.



          Ruin: influence not existence



          While God sought to destroy or ruin the influence that ‘flesh’ wielded on the earth, He had no intention of eradicating or exterminating flesh altogether, let alone eliminating it.



          This is also demonstrated by the ark, which protected certain flesh under the influence of Noah and his family (who listened to God instead of being led by the flesh).



          Conclusion



          So the intention behind the Flood was not to annihilate species or flesh in general, but to remove the influence of ‘flesh’ (evolutionary instinct, fear, hatred, anger, etc) on the world, and provide a new opportunity for the Spirit of God to lead the way through Noah.






          share|improve this answer























            Your Answer







            StackExchange.ifUsing("editor", function () {
            return StackExchange.using("virtualKeyboard", function () {
            StackExchange.virtualKeyboard.init("hebrew");
            });
            }, "virtkeyb");

            StackExchange.ready(function() {
            var channelOptions = {
            tags: "".split(" "),
            id: "320"
            };
            initTagRenderer("".split(" "), "".split(" "), channelOptions);

            StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function() {
            // Have to fire editor after snippets, if snippets enabled
            if (StackExchange.settings.snippets.snippetsEnabled) {
            StackExchange.using("snippets", function() {
            createEditor();
            });
            }
            else {
            createEditor();
            }
            });

            function createEditor() {
            StackExchange.prepareEditor({
            heartbeatType: 'answer',
            autoActivateHeartbeat: false,
            convertImagesToLinks: false,
            noModals: true,
            showLowRepImageUploadWarning: true,
            reputationToPostImages: null,
            bindNavPrevention: true,
            postfix: "",
            imageUploader: {
            brandingHtml: "Powered by u003ca class="icon-imgur-white" href="https://imgur.com/"u003eu003c/au003e",
            contentPolicyHtml: "User contributions licensed under u003ca href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"u003ecc by-sa 3.0 with attribution requiredu003c/au003e u003ca href="https://stackoverflow.com/legal/content-policy"u003e(content policy)u003c/au003e",
            allowUrls: true
            },
            noCode: true, onDemand: true,
            discardSelector: ".discard-answer"
            ,immediatelyShowMarkdownHelp:true
            });


            }
            });














            draft saved

            draft discarded


















            StackExchange.ready(
            function () {
            StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fhermeneutics.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f38539%2fdifference-of-words-in-genesis-67-and-genesis-617%23new-answer', 'question_page');
            }
            );

            Post as a guest















            Required, but never shown

























            1 Answer
            1






            active

            oldest

            votes








            1 Answer
            1






            active

            oldest

            votes









            active

            oldest

            votes






            active

            oldest

            votes









            2














            Not a complete annihilation



            The first term refers to an action against man and the animals - exterminating or eradicating the individual creatures currently living. ‘Exterminating’ does not wipe out a species - it only removes the living creatures.



            The second term refers to an action against flesh in general - ruining flesh as a whole. To ‘ruin’ something is also not to permanently remove it, but to take away its ability to function as before.



            The impression I get is of intention:



            Extermination: living creatures not species



            While God sought to eradicate the actual, individual creatures that were currently living, He had no intention of eliminating any species in general.



            This is demonstrated by the ark, which protected one breeding pair of each species.



            Ruin: influence not existence



            While God sought to destroy or ruin the influence that ‘flesh’ wielded on the earth, He had no intention of eradicating or exterminating flesh altogether, let alone eliminating it.



            This is also demonstrated by the ark, which protected certain flesh under the influence of Noah and his family (who listened to God instead of being led by the flesh).



            Conclusion



            So the intention behind the Flood was not to annihilate species or flesh in general, but to remove the influence of ‘flesh’ (evolutionary instinct, fear, hatred, anger, etc) on the world, and provide a new opportunity for the Spirit of God to lead the way through Noah.






            share|improve this answer




























              2














              Not a complete annihilation



              The first term refers to an action against man and the animals - exterminating or eradicating the individual creatures currently living. ‘Exterminating’ does not wipe out a species - it only removes the living creatures.



              The second term refers to an action against flesh in general - ruining flesh as a whole. To ‘ruin’ something is also not to permanently remove it, but to take away its ability to function as before.



              The impression I get is of intention:



              Extermination: living creatures not species



              While God sought to eradicate the actual, individual creatures that were currently living, He had no intention of eliminating any species in general.



              This is demonstrated by the ark, which protected one breeding pair of each species.



              Ruin: influence not existence



              While God sought to destroy or ruin the influence that ‘flesh’ wielded on the earth, He had no intention of eradicating or exterminating flesh altogether, let alone eliminating it.



              This is also demonstrated by the ark, which protected certain flesh under the influence of Noah and his family (who listened to God instead of being led by the flesh).



              Conclusion



              So the intention behind the Flood was not to annihilate species or flesh in general, but to remove the influence of ‘flesh’ (evolutionary instinct, fear, hatred, anger, etc) on the world, and provide a new opportunity for the Spirit of God to lead the way through Noah.






              share|improve this answer


























                2












                2








                2







                Not a complete annihilation



                The first term refers to an action against man and the animals - exterminating or eradicating the individual creatures currently living. ‘Exterminating’ does not wipe out a species - it only removes the living creatures.



                The second term refers to an action against flesh in general - ruining flesh as a whole. To ‘ruin’ something is also not to permanently remove it, but to take away its ability to function as before.



                The impression I get is of intention:



                Extermination: living creatures not species



                While God sought to eradicate the actual, individual creatures that were currently living, He had no intention of eliminating any species in general.



                This is demonstrated by the ark, which protected one breeding pair of each species.



                Ruin: influence not existence



                While God sought to destroy or ruin the influence that ‘flesh’ wielded on the earth, He had no intention of eradicating or exterminating flesh altogether, let alone eliminating it.



                This is also demonstrated by the ark, which protected certain flesh under the influence of Noah and his family (who listened to God instead of being led by the flesh).



                Conclusion



                So the intention behind the Flood was not to annihilate species or flesh in general, but to remove the influence of ‘flesh’ (evolutionary instinct, fear, hatred, anger, etc) on the world, and provide a new opportunity for the Spirit of God to lead the way through Noah.






                share|improve this answer













                Not a complete annihilation



                The first term refers to an action against man and the animals - exterminating or eradicating the individual creatures currently living. ‘Exterminating’ does not wipe out a species - it only removes the living creatures.



                The second term refers to an action against flesh in general - ruining flesh as a whole. To ‘ruin’ something is also not to permanently remove it, but to take away its ability to function as before.



                The impression I get is of intention:



                Extermination: living creatures not species



                While God sought to eradicate the actual, individual creatures that were currently living, He had no intention of eliminating any species in general.



                This is demonstrated by the ark, which protected one breeding pair of each species.



                Ruin: influence not existence



                While God sought to destroy or ruin the influence that ‘flesh’ wielded on the earth, He had no intention of eradicating or exterminating flesh altogether, let alone eliminating it.



                This is also demonstrated by the ark, which protected certain flesh under the influence of Noah and his family (who listened to God instead of being led by the flesh).



                Conclusion



                So the intention behind the Flood was not to annihilate species or flesh in general, but to remove the influence of ‘flesh’ (evolutionary instinct, fear, hatred, anger, etc) on the world, and provide a new opportunity for the Spirit of God to lead the way through Noah.







                share|improve this answer












                share|improve this answer



                share|improve this answer










                answered 3 hours ago









                PossibilityPossibility

                64518




                64518






























                    draft saved

                    draft discarded




















































                    Thanks for contributing an answer to Biblical Hermeneutics Stack Exchange!


                    • Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!

                    But avoid



                    • Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.

                    • Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.


                    To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.




                    draft saved


                    draft discarded














                    StackExchange.ready(
                    function () {
                    StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fhermeneutics.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f38539%2fdifference-of-words-in-genesis-67-and-genesis-617%23new-answer', 'question_page');
                    }
                    );

                    Post as a guest















                    Required, but never shown





















































                    Required, but never shown














                    Required, but never shown












                    Required, but never shown







                    Required, but never shown

































                    Required, but never shown














                    Required, but never shown












                    Required, but never shown







                    Required, but never shown







                    Popular posts from this blog

                    Ponta tanko

                    Tantalo (mitologio)

                    Erzsébet Schaár