Papers by ellen van wolde
Journal of Hebrew Scriptures , 2026
The present article counters the common assumption that ברא Qal with subject God means “to create... more The present article counters the common assumption that ברא Qal with subject God means “to create” and the common rendering of humanity “created in God’s image” in Gen 1:26-27. A number of scholars in the past expressed doubts about the understanding of ברא Qal “to create,” and concluded that ברא Qal might better be understood in terms of separation or division. I further build on these arguments and extend it with an analysis of all verbal constructions of ברא Qal in the Hebrew Bible. Based on this analysis I propose a new reading of Gen 1:26-27. The conclusion is that this text tells that God sets the human being apart from all other living beings in its capacity to make God present on earth.
One Bow or Another? A Study of the Bow in Genesis 9:8-17
Vetus Testamentum, 2013
Because Gen. 9:8-17 uses the word qĕsĕtin relation to the deity and to the clouds, the inference ... more Because Gen. 9:8-17 uses the word qĕsĕtin relation to the deity and to the clouds, the inference has been made in biblical scholarship that the text refers to a rainbow. The plausibility of this inference is tested in this article. Attention is given to the various linguistic aspects of this word in the Hebrew Bible and to the specific textual composition of Gen. 9:8-17 as well as to the broader ancient Near Eastern framework established by comparative literary and iconographic evidence. The conclusion is reached that the word qĕsĕtdesignates in Gen. 9:8-17 a warrior’s bow which represents both the deity’s might and power as well as his willingness to transfer his power over the earth to those living on it.
Greimas and Peirce. Greimas' Generative Semiotics and Elements from Peirce's Semiotics United into a Generative Explanatory Model
Item does not contain fulltex
The Journal of Hebrew Scriptures, 2011
should be construed as to spatially separate remains a viable explanation for the semantics of ... more should be construed as to spatially separate remains a viable explanation for the semantics of this verb.
The Computational Fallacy. A Semiotic Textlinguistic Approach
Item does not contain fulltex
Preguntas acerca de un mundo sin justicia
Semiotiek en haar betekenis voor de theologie
Item does not contain fulltex
History, Prophecy, Identity and Language in the Hebrew Bible, 2026
Amos 4:13 is commonly read as a text that regards creation. A careful analysis of each of the wor... more Amos 4:13 is commonly read as a text that regards creation. A careful analysis of each of the words and phrases shows that YHWH's forming of mountains, his unleashing of wind and his trampling on the earth all have a destructive sense. The entire verse 13 builds up and continues the previous verses that talk about destruction and elimination. Amos 4:13 is part of this rhetorical strategy with a climactic threat of total extinction. It does so by describing YHWH as uncompromising terminator, and not as creator.
Journal for the Study of the Old Testament, 2025
The meaning of the verb קנה in Gen. 4.1 is vigorously debated. While a majority of scholars ack... more The meaning of the verb קנה in Gen. 4.1 is vigorously debated. While a majority of scholars acknowledge that this verb has an economic-legal meaning 'to acquire, purchase, come to possess or take into possession', they have difficulty in accepting this meaning for Gen. 4.1. The construction of את-יהוה קניתי in Eve's reported speech creates further uncertainties. The proposal of the present author is to focus on the clausal constructions in which the verb קנה is used in the Hebrew Bible. Based on this linguistic analysis and on a study of the textual context of the verse, the author argues that Eve does not speak about creating or begetting a child, but about her acquiring a man from YHWH.
Vetus Testamentum, 2021
Exodus 3:14–15 provide an answer to Moses’ question in v. 13, but with surprising unanimity schol... more Exodus 3:14–15 provide an answer to Moses’ question in v. 13, but with surprising unanimity scholars have concluded that v. 14 is the heart of the section due to the supposed significance of the name Yhwh for the determining Yhwh’s original character. This focus on v. 14 has led most scholars to overlook the fact that v. 15a is a second answer to the question, and that v. 15b presents two complementary, but distinct dimensions of the deity. In v. 15b, the demonstratives וזה … זה, the nouns שמי and זכרי, and the temporal adverbial compounds לעלם and לדר דר, each point toward two distinct referents: Yhwh and Elohim. The first clause highlights the timeless nature of Yhwh’s name, while the second clause underscores the need to memorialize Elohim as the God of the ancestors and future Israelite generations.
Proceedings of the 18th Joint Meeting of SOTS and OTW, Nottingham 2022
Because Amos 4.13 contains the verbs יצר, ברא ,עשה side by side, it is often concluded that these... more Because Amos 4.13 contains the verbs יצר, ברא ,עשה side by side, it is often concluded that these verbs are synonyms and that this text is a creation hymn. A linguistic analysis is made of all lexemes in this verse and of their textual, natural, cognitive, and cultural context. An extensive analysis of the polysemous structure of the verb ברא shows how this verb’s meaning organizes around the two spatial notions of setting apart and separating. The conclusion for Amos 4.13 is that it pictures YHWH not as the creator, but as the terminator.
Diferentes perspectivas sobre la fe y la justicia: el Dios de Jacob y el Dios de Job
Concilium: Revista internacional de teología, 2002
Uploads
Papers by ellen van wolde