And every plant of the field before it was in the earth, and every herb of the field before it grew: for the LORD God had not caused it to rain upon the earth, and [there was] not a man to till the ground.
5. And no plant, &c.] If, as is possible, Gen 2:5-6 are a parenthesis then Gen 2:7 carries on the sentence of Gen 2:4 b. The whole sentence would then run, “At the time when Jehovah Elohim made earth and heaven (there was as yet no plant of the field face of the ground), Jehovah Elohim formed man.” But this arrangement is too cumbrous to be probable. Moreover, the state of things described in Gen 2:5-6 is evidently one of considerable duration; it intervenes between the making of the earth and the heavens ( Gen 2:4 b) and the formation of man ( Gen 2:7). It is better to regard Gen 2:5 as the apodosis to Gen 2:4 b, “At the time when Jehovah Elohim made, &c., (5) there was as yet no plant, &c., (6) but a mist (or, flood) used to come up, &c.”
plant of the field herb of the field ] The word “plant “is the same in the original as that rendered “shrub” in Gen 21:15, the stunted growth of the desert under which Hagar cast her child, and “bushes” in Job 30:4; Job 30:7. The “herb” is the vegetation useful for food and requiring cultivation. There was no “plant” or “bush,” because the Lord God had not yet caused it to rain: there was no “herb,” because there was no man to prepare the ground. In the absence of rain and of tillage there was no vegetation. The ground originally was desert, without tree, bush, or grass.
Fuente: The Cambridge Bible for Schools and Colleges
Gen 2:5
Every plant of the field
The leaf
One of the most beautiful scientific generalizations was the result, not of the patient, persevering researches of the naturalist, but of the dreamy reverie of a peer.
On the meditative mind of Goethe on one occasion dawned the bright idea, that the flower of a plant is not, as is commonly supposed, an added or separate organ, but only the highest development, or rather transformation of its leaves–that all the parts of a plant, from the seed to the blossom, are mere modifications of a leaf. This one idea has done more to lift the veil of mystery from nature, and to interpret the plans and purposes of the Creator, than all the previous labours of botanists. It shows us order in the midst of confusion; simplicity in the midst of apparently inextricable complexity; unity of plan amid endless diversity of form. Thoreau, watching the leafy expansions of frost vegetation on the window pane and on the blades of grass, declared that the Maker of this earth but patented a leaf. He traced the leaf pattern throughout all the kingdoms of Nature. He saw it in the brilliant feathers of birds; in the lustrous wings of insects; in the pearly scales of fishes; in the blue-veined palm of the human hand; and in the ivory shell of the human ear. The earth itself, according to him, is but a vast leaf veined with silver rivers and streams, with irregularities of surface formed by mountains and valleys, and varied tints of green in forest and field, and great bright spaces of sea and lake. This, however, is a mere transcendental idea when thus applied to all the departments of nature; it is scientific truth only when confined to the vegetable kingdom. But the unity of which it speaks may be traced everywhere. All the recent discoveries of science, both as regards the forms and the forces of matter, have an obvious tendency to simplify greatly the scheme of nature, and reduce its phenomena to the operation of a few simple laws; and in this respect they have a profound theological significance. Amid these brilliant generalizations, we cannot stop short until we have reached the highest and sublimest generalization, and nature has led us by such great altar steps up to natures God. The theory of the leaf, as lying at the basis of the vegetable kingdom, requires more particular explanation. All plants are produced from seeds or buds; the one free, the other attached; the one spreading the plant geographically, the other increasing its individual size. Carefully examined, the seed, or starting point in the life of a plant, is composed of a leaf rolled tight, and altered in tissue and contents, so as to suit its new requirements. The real character of a seed may be seen in the germination of a bean, when the two leaves of which it is composed appear in the fleshy lobes or cotyledons which first rise above ground, and afford nourishment to the embryo. The bud, or epitome of the plant, which is physiologically co-ordinate with the seed, is also found to consist of leaves folded in a peculiar manner, and covered with tough leathery scales to protect them from the winters cold; and in spring it evolves the stem, leaves, and fruit–in short, every structure which comes of the seed. Further, all the appendages borne on the stem–such as scales, leaves, bracts, flowers, and fruit–are modifications of this one common type. Flowers, the glory of the vegetable world, are merely leaves, arranged so as to protect the vital organs within them, and coloured so as to attract insects to scatter the fertilizing pollen, and to reflect or absorb the light and heat of the sun for ripening the seed. Stamens and pistils may be converted by the skill of the gardener into petals, and the blossoms so produced are called double, and are, therefore, necessarily barren. The wild rose, for example, has only a single corolla; but when cultivated in rich soil, its numerous yellow stamens are changed into the red leaves of the full-blown cabbage rose. That all the parts of the flower, the calyx, corolla, stamens, and pistils, are modified leaves, is proved by the fact that it is by no means uncommon for a plant to produce leaves instead of them. We come next to the fruit, which, in all its astonishing varieties of texture, colour, and shape, is also a modified leaf; and it is one of the most interesting studies in natural history, to trace the correspondence between the different parts of structures so greatly altered and the original type. In the peach, for instance, the stone is the upper skin of a leaf hardened so as to protect the kernel or seed; the pulp is the cellular tissue of a leaf expanded and endowed with nutritive properties for the sustenance of the embryo plant; and the beautiful downy skin on the outside is the lower cuticle of the leaf with a sun bloom upon it, the hollow line on one side of the fruit marking the union between the two edges of the leaf. So also in the apple; the parchment-like core is the upper surface of the leaf, and the flesh is the cellular tissue greatly swollen; in the orange, the juicy lips enclosing the seeds are the different sections of the leaf developed in an extraordinary manner; while through the transparent skin of the ripe gooseberry, we see the ramifications of the leaf veins, conclusively proving its origin. In all the parts and organs of the plant then, from the seed to the fruit, we have found that the leaf is the type or pattern after which they have been constructed; and those modifications of structure, colour, and composition, which they exhibit, are for special purposes in the economy of the plant in the first place, and ultimately for necessary services to the animal creation, and even to man himself, to whom the sweetness of the fruit and the beauty of the flower must have had reference in the gracious intentions of Him who created them both. On the leaf itself may be read, as unmistakeably as on a printed page, its morphological significance. As the architect draws on a chart the plan of a building, so the Divine Artist has engraved on the leaf the plan of the organism, of which it is the only essential typical appendage. Each leaf in shape and formation may be regarded as a miniature picture, a model of the whole plant on which it grows. The outline of a tree in full summer foliage may be seen represented in the outline of any one of its leaves; the uniform cellular tissue which composes the flat surface of the leaf being equivalent to the round irregular mass of the foliage. In fact, the green cells which clothe the veins of the leaf, and fill up all its interspaces, may be regarded as the analogues of the green leaves which clothe the branches of the tree: and although the leaf be in one plane, there are many trees, such as the beach, whose foliage, when looked at from a certain point of view, is also seen to be in one plane. Tall pyramidal trees have narrow leaves, as we see in the needles of the pine; while wide-spreading trees, on the other hand, have broad leaves, as may be observed in those of the elm or sycamore. In every case the correspondence between the shape of the individual leaf and the whole mass of the foliage is remarkably exact, even in the minutest particulars, and cannot fail to strike with wonder everyone who notices it for the first time. Examining the leaf more carefully, we find that the fibrous veins which ramify over its surface bear a close resemblance to the ramification of the trunk and branches of the parent tree; they are both given off at the same angles, and are so precisely alike in their complexity or simplicity, that from a single leaf we can predicate with the utmost certainty the appearance of the whole tree from which it fell, just as the skilful anatomist can construct in imagination, from a single bone or tooth, the whole animal organism of which it formed a part. In connection with this general typical character of the leaf may be viewed its particular typical significance, as representing the three great classes into which the vegetable kingdom has been divided. That it is possible to determine from the leaf alone, or even from the smallest fragment of it, what position to assign to any given plant in our systems of classification, is surely owing to the fact that the plan of the leaf is the basis upon which all vegetation, as a distinct kind of life, has been constructed. There is no end to the diversity of shape which leaves display; almost every species of plant having a different kind of leaf. But it almost never occurs to us to ask ourselves the object of this variation of shape. We regard it as a thing of course, or refer it to that boundless variety which characterises all the works of nature, in accommodation, we proudly but foolishly suppose, to mans hatred of uniformity. But observation and reflection will convince us that there is a special reason for it; that the shapes of leaves are not capricious or accidental, but formed according, to an invariable law, the council of His will with whom there is no variableness or shadow of turning. In the first place there is a morphological reason for it. The shape of leaves depends upon the distribution of the veins, and the distribution of the veins upon the mode of branching in the plant, and the mode of branching in the plant to its typical character as an exogens or endogens, and its typical character brings us back again to the leaf. When the leaf is simple, the branching of the stem and the blossoms is simple; and when the leaf is compound, all the parts of the plant are also compound. But besides this morphological reason for the immense variety of leaf shapes, there are also teleological and geographical reasons. Leaves are adapted not only to the typical character of the whole plant, but also to the character of the situation in which it grows. They are, moreover, exactly constructed to shade and shelter, or freely expose to the light and air, the plants on which they are found, and to transmit the dews and rains which fall upon them to the young absorbing roots. He who studies attentively and reverently the numerous wonderful modifications in shape and structure which the typical leaf undergoes, to suit the varied circumstances of plants, will be brought by this study, more closely than by anything out of the Bible, into the personal presence of Him who said, My Father worketh hitherto, and I work. I have often had a train of reflections of the most profitable kind awakened in my mind by simply looking at the common water ranunculus, whose white flowers cover the surface of many of our quiet rivulets in June, and observing that the leaves floating or the top of the water were round and broad, whereas the lower ones, immersed in the stream, were divided into a vast number of linear segments, so as not to impede the current or be torn by its force. Even in gazing on the common gorse or whin of our hillsides–a plant, apart from the golden glory with which the summer halos it, not very attractive to the lover of beauty–I have been often struck with the same adaptation to the tempestuous currents of the air, in its sharp needle-like leaves and stems–a proof of Gods care over the homeliest thing, giving more honour to that which lacked it. But feelings of greater interest still will be excited by the more wonderful adaptations which we see in the tropical plants growing in our conservatories. The mimosa, peculiarly exposed to injury, sensitively drooping its leaves at the slightest touch; the pitcher plant, holding up its leaf goblets filled with water to refresh it in the thirsty desert; the leaf of the Venus flytrap of North America, closing together on its prey by turning on its mid-rib as on a hinge; the leaf of the cactus growing on the dry plateaus of Mexico, fleshy and juicy, and having no evaporating pores in its skin, so that the moisture imbibed by the root is retained; the gigantic leaf of the royal water lily of South America, furnished on the underside with outstanding veins of great depth, acting as so many supporting ribs: these and a thousand other instances almost equally remarkable, that might be alluded to, attract the most careless eye, and in their strange variations from the typical form, disclose abundant proof of beneficent design. The colours as well as the shapes of leaves are wonderfully diversified, though green is the prevailing hue, and every varied shade of that colour, from the darkest to the lightest tint, is exhibited–and very beautifully, for instance, in the verdure of spring; yet the whole chromatic scale may be seen illustrated in the foliage of plants. Indeed, where it is possible to see specimens of the whole vegetable kingdom growing together, an autumnal forest would not exhibit greater varieties of coloured foliage. In some plants the leaves are as beautiful as the flowers of other plants: and these are now cultivated and grouped with great effect in our conservatories. A greenhouse full of beautifully foliaged plants, is as attractive as one stocked with gay blossoms. It is a remarkable circumstance, that when the leaves are dressed in bright crimson, or golden, or silvery splendours, the flowers are almost invariably sombre in hue, and insignificant in form and size. What purposes such beautiful leaves may serve in the economy of vegetation, we cannot in every case find out satisfactorily. It may be to absorb or reflect the light and heat of the sun in a peculiar way, or to guard the vital organs from injury by diverting attention from them. In orchids and other plants, the blossoms are gorgeously coloured and peculiarly shaped, in order to attract insects, without whose agency the species could not be fertilized or propagated. But in plants where the foliage is large and beautiful, and the flower minute and sombre, it seems as if Nature wished to conceal her vital processes, lest they should be frustrated or injured by animals. Probably, also, the same law of compensation may be illustrated in the case of coloured leaves, as in the irregular corolla of flowers, where the odd petal has a different and much brighter colour, as in the common pansy. Do not these curious plants, that among their leaves of light have no need of flowers, resemble those lure human plants, that develope all the beauties of mind and character at an exceptionally early age, and rapidly ripen for the tomb? They do not live to bring forth the flowers and the fruit of lifes vigorous prime; and therefore God converts their foliage into flowers, crowns the initial stage with the glories of the final, and makes their very leaves beautiful. By the transfiguration of His grace, by the light that never was on sea or land, He adorns even their tender years with all the loveliness which in other cases comes only with full maturity. (H. Macmillan, LL. D.)
There was not a man to till the ground
The earth without a man
I. THE WORLDS INDEPENDENCY OF MAN. The terraqueous globe, embosomed in those wonderful heavens, and filled with every species of vegetable and animal life, existed before man appeared.
1. The world can do without him. The heavens would be as bright, the earth as beautiful, the waves of the ocean as sublime, the song of the bird is as sweet; were man no more.
2. He cannot do without the world. He needs its bright skies, and flowing rivers, and productive soil, etc. He is the most dependent of all creatures.
II. THE WORLDS INCOMPLETENESS WITHOUT MAN. Without man the world would be a school without a pupil, a theatre without a spectator, a mansion without a resident, a temple without a worshipper. Learn from this subject–
1. The lesson of adoring gratitude to the Creator. Adore Him for the fact, the capabilities, and the sphere of your existence.
2. The lesson of profound humility. The world can do without thee, my brother; has done without thee; and will do without thee.
III. THE WORLDS CLAIM UPON MAN. The earth He hath given to the children of men. The nature of this gift proclaims the obligation of the receiver.
1. The world is filled with material treasures; develop and use them.
2. The world is fertile with moral lessons; interpret and apply them.
3. The world is filled with the presence of God; walk reverently. (Homilist.)
Observations
I. EVERY HERB AND PLANT UPON THE EARTH IS GODS CREATURE.
II. NOT ONLY THE MERCIES OF GOD IS GENERAL, BUT EVERY PARTICULAR BLESSING MUST BE TAKEN NOTICE OF AS COMING FROM GOD.
III. THAT WHICH IS BROUGHT TO PASS WITHOUT ORDINARY MEANS, MUST NEEDS BE WROUGHT BY THE HAND AND POWER OF GOD HIMSELF.
IV. THERE CAN BE NO RAIN ON THE EARTH UNLESS GOD SEND IT.
V. IT IS BY RAIN FROM HEAVEN THAT ALL THE HERBS AND PLANTS ON THE FACE OF THE EARTH DO GROW AND ARE NOURISHED.
VI. THOUGH GOD BE PLEASED TO MAKE USE OF MANS LABOUR IN PRODUCING AND CHERISHING THE FRUITS OF THE EARTH, YET HE CAN INCREASE AND PRESERVE THEM WITHOUT IT.
VII. THOUGH THE FRUITFULNESS OF THE EARTH COME ONLY BY GODS BLESSING, YET THE LABOUR OF MAN IS REQUIRED AS THE ORDINARY MEANS TO FURTHER IT. (J. White.)
Observations
I. GOD WANTS NO VARIETY OF MEANS TO EFFECT WHATSOEVER HE WILL.
II. GOD CAN, AND MANY TIMES DOTH, BRING THINGS TO PASS WITHOUT ANY MEANS AT ALL.
III. GODS POWER IN EFFECTING ALL THINGS IS NEVER CLEARLY DISCOVERED UNTIL ALL MEANS BE REMOVED.
IV. EVERY CREATURE OUGHT IN AN ESPECIAL MANNER TO BE USEFUL UNTO THAT FROM WHENCE IT IS PRODUCED. (J. White.)
A gardener wanted
Here begins that great system of Divine and human cooperation which is still in progress. There were trees, plants, herbs, and flowers, but a gardener was wanted to get out of the earth everything that the earth could yield. By planting, and transplanting, and replanting, you may turn a coarse tree into a rare botanical specimen,–you may refine it by development. So man got something for his own pains, and became a sort of secondary creator! This was also too much for him. He began to think that he had done nearly everything himself, quite forgetting who gave him the germs, the tools, the skill, and the time. It is so easy for you junior partners in old city firms to think that the house would have been nowhere if you had not gone into partnership! But really and truly, odd as it may seem, there was a house before you took it up and glorified it. What a chance had man in beginning life as a gardener! Beginning life in the open sunny air, without even a hothouse to try his temper! Surely he ought to have done something better than he did. The air was pure, the climate was bright, the soil was kindly: you had but to tickle it with a spade and it laughed in flowers. And a river in the grounds! Woe to those who have their water far to fetch! But here in the garden is the stream, so broad that at the moment it is liberated from the sacred place it divides itself into four evangelists, carrying everywhere the odours of Eden and the offer of kindly help. Surely, then, man was well housed to begin with. He did not begin life as a beggar. He farmed his own God-given land, without disease, or disability, or taxation to fret him; yet what did he make of the fruitful inheritance? Did the roots turn to poison in his mouth, and the flowers hang their heads in shame when his shadow fell on them? We shall see. (J. Parker, D. D.)
Fuente: Biblical Illustrator Edited by Joseph S. Exell
Verse 5. Every plant of the field before it was in the earth] It appears that God created every thing, not only perfect as it respects its nature, but also in a state of maturity, so that every vegetable production appeared at once in full growth; and this was necessary that man, when he came into being, might find every thing ready for his use.
Fuente: Adam Clarke’s Commentary and Critical Notes on the Bible
Before it was in the earth, i.e. when as yet there were no plants, nor so much as seeds of them, there.
Before it grew, to wit, out of the earth, as afterwards they did by Gods appointment.
The two great means of the growth of plants and herbs, viz. rain from heaven, and the labour of man, were both lacking, to show that they were now brought forth by Gods almighty power and word.
Fuente: English Annotations on the Holy Bible by Matthew Poole
5, 6. rain, mist(See on Ge1:11).
Fuente: Jamieson, Fausset and Brown’s Commentary Critical and Explanatory on the Whole Bible
And every plant of the field, before it was in the earth,…. That is, God made it, even he who made the heavens and the earth; for these words depend upon the preceding, and are in close connection with them; signifying that the plants of the field, which were made out of the earth on the third day, were made before any were planted in it, or any seed was sown therein from whence they could proceed, and therefore must be the immediate production of divine power:
and every herb of the field before it grew: those at once sprung up in perfection out of the earth, before there were any that budded forth, and grew up by degrees to perfection, as herbs do now:
for the Lord God had not caused it to rain upon the earth: so that the production of plants and herbs in their first formation could not be owing to that; since on the third day, when they were made, there was no sun to exhale and draw up the waters into the clouds, in order to be let down again in showers of rain:
and there [was] not a man to till the ground; who was not created till the sixth day, and therefore could have no concern in the cultivation of the earth, and of the plants and herbs in it; but these were the produce of almighty power, without the use of any means: some Jewish writers f, by the plant and herb of the field, mystically understand the first and second Messiah, for they sometimes feign two; see Isa 4:2
f Zohar in Gen. fol. 32. 4.
Fuente: John Gill’s Exposition of the Entire Bible
The account in vv. 5-25 is not a second, complete and independent history of the creation, nor does it contain mere appendices to the account in Gen 1; but it describes the commencement of the history of the human race. This commencement includes not only a complete account of the creation of the first human pair, but a description of the place which God prepared for their abode, the latter being of the highest importance in relation to the self-determination of man, with its momentous consequences to both earth and heaven. Even in the history of the creation man takes precedence of all other creatures, as being created in the image of God and appointed lord of all the earth, though he is simply mentioned there as the last and highest link in the creation. To this our present account is attached, describing with greater minuteness the position of man in the creation, and explaining the circumstances which exerted the greatest influence upon his subsequent career. These circumstances were-the formation of man from the dust of the earth and the divine breath of life; the tree of knowledge in paradise; the formation of the woman, and the relation of the woman to the man. Of these three elements, the first forms the substratum to the other two. Hence the more exact account of the creation of Adam is subordinated to, and inserted in, the description of paradise (Gen 2:7). In Gen 2:5 and Gen 2:6, with which the narrative commences, there is an evident allusion to paradise: “ And as yet there was (arose, grew) no shrub of the field upon the earth, and no herb of the field sprouted; for Jehovah El had not caused it to rain upon the earth, and there was no man to till the ground; and a mist arose from the earth and watered the whole surface of the ground.” in parallelism with means to become, to arise, to proceed. Although the growth of the shrubs and sprouting of the herbs are represented here as dependent upon the rain and the cultivation of the earth by man, we must not understand the words as meaning that there was neither shrub nor herb before the rain and dew, or before the creation of man, and so draw the conclusion that the creation of the plants occurred either after or contemporaneously with the creation of man, in direct contradiction to Gen 1:11-12. The creation of the plants is not alluded to here at all, but simply the planting of the garden in Eden. The growing of the shrubs and sprouting of the herbs is different from the creation or first production of the vegetable kingdom, and relates to the growing and sprouting of the plants and germs which were called into existence by the creation, the natural development of the plants as it had steadily proceeded ever since the creation. This was dependent upon rain and human culture; their creation was not. Moreover, the shrub and herb of the field do not embrace the whole of the vegetable productions of the earth. It is not a fact that the field is used in the second section in the same sense as the earth in the first.” is not “the widespread plain of the earth, the broad expanse of land,” but a field of arable land, soil fit for cultivation, which forms only a part of the “earth” or “ground.” Even the “beast of the field” in Gen 2:19 and Gen 3:1 is not synonymous with the “beast of the earth” in Gen 1:24-25, but is a more restricted term, denoting only such animals as live upon the field and are supported by its produce, whereas the “beast of the earth” denotes all wild beasts as distinguished from tame cattle and reptiles. In the same way, the “shrub of the field” consists of such shrubs and tree-like productions of the cultivated land as man raises for the sake of their fruit, and the “herb of the field,” all seed-producing plants, both corn and vegetables, which serve as food for man and beast. – The mist ( , vapour, which falls as rain, Job 36:27) is correctly regarded by Delitzsch as the creative beginning of the rain ( ) itself, from which we may infer, therefore, that it rained before the flood.
Fuente: Keil & Delitzsch Commentary on the Old Testament
5. And every plant This verse is connected with the preceding, and must be read in continuation with it; for he annexes the plants and herbs to the earth, as the garment with which the Lord has adorned it, lest its nakedness should appear as a deformity. The noun שיה ( sicah, (110)) which we translate plant, sometimes signifies trees, as below, (Gen 21:15 (111)) Therefore, some in this place translate it shrub, to which I have no objection. Yet the word plant is not unsuitable; because in the former place, Moses seems to refer to the genus, and here to the species. (112) But although he has before related that the herbs were created on the third day, yet it is not without reason that here again mention is made of them, in order that we may know that they were then produced, preserved, and propagated, in a manner different from that which we perceive at the present day. For herbs and trees are produced from seed; or grafts are taken from another roots or they grow by putting forth shoots: in all this the industry and the hand of man are engaged. But, at that time, the method was different: God clothed the earth, not in the same manner as now, (for there was no seed, no root, no plant, which might germinate,) but each suddenly sprung into existence at the command of God, and by the power of his word. They possessed durable vigor, so that they might stand by the force of their own nature, and not by that quickening influence which is now perceived, not by the help of rain, not by the irrigation or culture of man; but by the vapor with which God watered the earth. For he excludes these two things, the rain whence the earth derives moisture, that it may retain its native sap; and human culture, which is the assistant of nature. When he says, that God had ‘not yet caused it to rain,’ he at the same time intimates that it is God who opens and shuts the cataracts of heaven, and that rain and drought are in his hand.
(110) שיח Frutex, stirps; a shrub — “ cujus pulluli in summa tellure expatiantur,” — “whose shoots are spread abroad over the surface of the earth.” — Robertson’s Clavis Pentateuch. — Ed
(111) “And the water was spent in the bottle, and she cast the child under one of the shrubs.” — English version.
(112) It seems remarkable that Calvin should himself translate the word “ virgultum,” and then reason, in his commentary, as if he preferred the word “ planta.” — Ed.
Fuente: Calvin’s Complete Commentary
(5)And every plant . . . The Authorised Version follows the LXX. in so translating this as to make it simply mean that God created vegetation. The more correct rendering is, There was no shrub of the field (no wild shrub) as yet on the earth, and no herb of the field had as yet sprung up. The purpose of the writer is to prepare for the planting of the paradise, though geology teaches us the literal truth of his words. When the earth was so hot that water existed only in the form of vapour, there could be no vegetation. Rain began on the second day; on the third the vapours were so largely condensed as for the waters to form seas; and on the same day vegetation began to clothe the cool, dry surface of the ground. To understand these opening words, we must bear in mind that the object of the narrative is not now the formation of the world, but mans relation to Jehovah, and thus the long stages of creation appear but as one days work.
Fuente: Ellicott’s Commentary for English Readers (Old and New Testaments)
5. And every plant before it was in the earth The common version is utterly wrong in connecting this verse with what precedes, and so punctuating it as to make plant and herb grammatically the objects of made in Gen 2:4, the same as earth and heavens of that verse . Literally this verse reads: And every shrub of the field not yet was ( , future form, involving the idea of becoming, arising, growing, in the land, and every herb of the field not yet was sprouting, for Jehovah-God had not caused it to rain upon the land; and no man to work the ground . This exhibits the Hebrew idiom, but a more proper translation would be: And no shrub of the field was yet arising in the land, and no herb of the field was yet sprouting . The future form , will be, taken in connexion with the future , will sprout, shows that a process of growth is contemplated, not the simple fact of existence. Hence the meaning is, (not that there was yet no plant or herb existing in the land, but,) none of the plants or herbs of the fields of Eden had as yet entered upon the processes of growth. A reason for this is given in the statement that rain had not yet fallen. The dry ground had been made to appear, (Gen 1:9,) and grass and herb had been produced by the Almighty fiat, (Gen 1:11-12,) but the ground was not yet watered with rain, and the processes of vegetation were not yet in progress .
Not a man to till the ground Here note that the conceptual standpoint is previous to the formation of man; and the whole narrative naturally reverts to what we may suppose to have been the condition of things on the morning of the sixth day. Nevertheless the exact order of events in this chapter is not definitely stated, as in chapter 1.
Fuente: Whedon’s Commentary on the Old and New Testaments
Gen 2:5. And every plant of the field, before it was in the earth That is, God when he made the heavens and the earth, made also, by his immediate power, every plant in its state of perfection, with its seed in it; before the several plants, thus produced, grew and increased in the natural and regular method by which they now grow and increase: and which method he appointed for that end, when things were regularly constituted, when the sun was appointed to shine, and the rain to fall upon the earth; and man was formed to cultivate the earth, and its produce. As yet it was otherwise: the vegetables were created and sustained by his power exerting itself in a peculiar manner: especially by causing a mist, vapour, or steam, to arise from the earth to water them. The sacred writer, by remarking that yet there was no man to cultivate the ground, nor any rain to water it, both which are necessary to the produce of vegetables, assures us, that vegetables were not, at first, produced in the ordinary method.
Fuente: Commentary on the Holy Bible by Thomas Coke
But of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil, thou shalt not eat of it: for in the day that thou eatest thereof thou shalt surely die.
The tree of life, (Gen 2:9 ) perhaps an emblem, or token of obedience, in the original covenant of works. And the tree of knowledge of good and evil; perhaps, a token that man, by disobedience, had learnt the knowledge of the good he had lost, and the evil he had taken to him. But how sweet to view, in the Person of Jesus, both the tree of life, and all the treasures of wisdom and knowledge. Rev 22:1-2 .
Fuente: Hawker’s Poor Man’s Commentary (Old and New Testaments)
Gen 2:5 And every plant of the field before it was in the earth, and every herb of the field before it grew: for the LORD God had not caused it to rain upon the earth, and [there was] not a man to till the ground.
Ver. 5. The Lord hath caused it to rain. ] And none but he can give rain, Jer 14:22 the means of fruitfulness, which yet he is not tied to as here. The Egyptians used in mockery to tell the Grecians, that if God should forget to rain, they might chance to starve for it.
Fuente: John Trapp’s Complete Commentary (Old and New Testaments)
every plant, &c. This is an expansion of Gen 1:11, Gen 1:12, giving details.
for. Three reasons why plants in ground “before they grew”: (1) no rain; (2) no man; (3)no mist: see Gen 2:6.
Fuente: Companion Bible Notes, Appendices and Graphics
plant: Gen 1:12, Psa 104:14
had not: Job 5:10, Job 38:26-28, Psa 65:9-11, Psa 135:7, Jer 14:22, Mat 5:45, Heb 6:7
to till: Gen 3:23, Gen 4:2, Gen 4:12
Reciprocal: Gen 1:11 – Let the Gen 7:4 – For Job 36:27 – he Isa 26:19 – thy dew Mar 4:28 – the earth
Fuente: The Treasury of Scripture Knowledge
Gen 2:5. Every plant before it was in the earth That is, when there was neither any plant, nor so much as any seed from which any could spring: and when, as is here observed, the two great means of the growth of vegetables were both wanting, rain from heaven and the labour of man. So that they were evidently produced by the word of Gods power alone. The English reader will observe in these two verses, the word LORD occurring for the first time. And he must remember that, whenever it occurs in our translation in capital letters, it stands for Jehovah. This is that name of God which implies self-existence, independence, and eternity, and signifies one that has being in and of himself, and is the source of being to all that exists. It is well explained by himself, Rev 1:8, I am Alpha and Omega, the beginning and the ending, which is and was, and is to come; the Almighty!
Fuente: Joseph Bensons Commentary on the Old and New Testaments
2:5 And every plant of the field before it was in the earth, and every herb of the field before it grew: for the LORD God had not caused it to {d} rain upon the earth, and [there was] not a man to till the ground.
(d) God only opens the heavens and shuts them, he sends drought and rain according to his good pleasure.
Fuente: Geneva Bible Notes
These verses describe global conditions before man’s creation in terms that stress God’s gracious preparation of the world for him. They are a flashback to conditions before Gen 1:26. Moses chose terms that contrast with conditions that existed after the Fall. [Note: Sailhamer, "Genesis," p. 40.] "Shrubs" were evidently not edible whereas "plants" were. Thus Moses distinguished two types of land: arable and non-arable. [Note: Wenham, p. 58.]
The absence of "rain" and the presence of the "mist" have led some writers to postulate a "canopy theory." [Note: Whitcomb and Morris; Jody Dillow, The Waters Above.] According to this theory, a canopy of water vapor that watered the earth covered the earth initially. It reduced the destructive rays of the sun so that antediluvian man lived much longer, and it distributed heat more evenly over the surface of this planet. Such a water canopy covers Venus. This canopy supposedly broke up when God sent the Flood (Gen 7:11). This is another of those theories that are impossible to prove or disprove conclusively. [Note: For a critique of this view, see Thomas Key, "Does the Canopy Theory Hold Water?" See also Stanley Rice, "Botanical and Ecological Objections to a Preflood Water Canopy," Journal of the American Scientific Affiliation 37:4 (December 1985):223-29.]