Chapter 4 Notes
123) Genesis 2:19
124) Genesis 6:21
125) The original Hebrew in Genesis 7:2 says there were “
” (seven seven) animals, followed by “
” (a male and his female) which might be translated as “seven male and seven female” animals.
126) Genesis 6:19 indicates that just two unclean animals (Strong’s 8147, 
, shenayim or “couples”) were to be boarded, describing the pair as a gender matched set. The gender-matched pairs are also described in Genesis 7:8-9, where 
is describing the couples of clean animals boarding the ark along with couples of unclean animals.
127) The texts introduce three types of gifts, but not three men, ref. Matthew 2:1.
128) Genesis 9:2
129) The Hebrew word for “store it away” is better translated as “collect” or “gather” (
, 'âsaph, Strong’s H622), which is closely related to the Hebrew word for “add” or “increase,” (
, yâsaph, Strong’s H3254), which is used in context of bearing offspring.
130) The text might also allow for clean pairs to arrive via Genesis 6:19-20, with Noah assuming the responsibility of increasing the herd sizes per Genesis 6:21-22, such that he arrived at 7 pairs of clean animals at Genesis 7:2.
131) Human dietary needs would be a fraction of Noah’s clean animal cargo. A single cow can produce hundreds of pounds of beef, which Noah and family may have shared with unclean animals, and which would be occasionally slaughtered for the sake of unclean animal feed.
132) The 7 to 1 ratio also seems to be consistent with the ark’s human cargo. Noah brought 3 sons, and each man on the ark had a wife. However, terminology from Leviticus 18:7 suggests that Ham had a forbidden sexual relationship with Noah’s wife in Genesis 9:22, producing Canaan. Thus, Noah cursed Canaan in Genesis 9:25, much like Moses warranted the excommunication of the inbred in Deuteronomy 22:30-23:2. Thus, Ham might be considered as the lone unclean and impure passenger on board the ark relative to the 7 perfect or pure family members.
133) Unclean carnivorous mammals often reproduce in larger litters than do clean mammal varieties, thus they would need a head start in repopulating the planet, and hence the 7-to-1 ratio.
134) Even if only a single clean animal of each variety was offered, slaughtering and butchering animals of every clean variety as the text describes would take days; therefore it is impractical to infer that the majority of the seven clean pairs were boarded exclusively for the sake of sacrifice.
135) From Strong’s H5414, 
(nâthan), to give
136) The KJV was written four centuries ago, when the English term “meat” generically referred to food, not exclusively to food derived from animal flesh, as it does today.
137) Genesis 1:22
138) The verb 
(from Strong’s H1961, hâyâh, meaning “to be”) is presented in an imperfect form, referring to an ongoing state of existence, and not alluding to a beginning, as implied by the interlinear “becoming” text; neither should the verb be rendered as a “shall” permissive mandate or a “will” predictive permissive statement, as presented in popular English translations (see Table 2a).
139) Given that 
(châyâh, Strong’s H2421) is acting as a verb meaning “live” or “sustain” instead of an adjective (Strong’s H2416) qualifying animal souls, translator interjection of the verse 29 verb/pronoun 
(I gave) into verse 30 is unwarranted.
140) With recipients of God’s gifts being human and acting as a verb, the 
does not designate 
as a gift or exclusive animal diet; rather the phrase 
(which is its soul sustained) is expanded with the to encompass (all green plants), thus the animal’s soul or 
is qualified.
141) If beasts, birds, and bugs are not treated as objects of the verb (I gave) from verse 29, animals might be rendered as subjects relating to the verb 
. Thus, animal subjects have a purpose (i.e., “being for food”), joined casually (i.e., “therefore”) with condition (i.e., “green soul”). Left alone, verse 30 suggests this, “And for every beast, bird, and bug [with a soul sustained by green plants], for food it exists therefore.”
142) In conventional translations of Genesis 1:30, the English pronoun and verb “I give” (equivalent to) is added by translators. In so doing, the ('êth, Strong’s H853) is assumed to designate green herbs as the direct object (i.e., the gift from Elohim) of the inferred verb, with animals assumed to be the indirect object (i.e., the gift recipients).
143) Unlike verse 29, verse 30 associates no pronoun with the prepositional phrase “for food” or 
, thus leaving the reader open to decide to which noun the term should be applied.
144) Like the verb as discussed in verse 29 notes, is written in an imperfect form and should not be rendered in a completed or “was” past tense form. In other words, hvhu should not be treated as a mere affirmation of events that transpired.
145) e.g., locusts, grasshoppers, etc.
146) Fish are blessed to multiply in a prior verse, but their diet is not listed in the text.
147) Kosher mammals (e.g., cows and goats), unlike other herbivore animals (e.g., horses) can get sick and die from ingesting fruits and seeds (e.g., apples) due to stomach boating or seed toxins.
148) Seeded fruits/plants were not allotted to animals in Genesis 1:30.
149) Strong’s H6212, H2232, and H2233
150) Strong’s H6212 and H3418
151) This literal vegan animal diet interpretation of the Genesis 1 and 9 texts may help explain Exodus 23:19, Exodus 34:26, and Deuteronomy 14:21, which prohibit a young calf or kid being “ripened” (
, bâshal, Strong’s H1310) or growing on the milk of its mother. Thus, young animals may not be considered fit for human consumption as they are milk-fed, e.g., veal or young lamb. This may also correspond with texts prescribing 4 day period of separation of Passover lambs per Exodus 12:3-6.
152) Author’s translation
153) Assuming Strong’s H3644 (
, kâmô) is to be exchanged for the preposition “
”, terms such as “when” or “according to” may be preferable English substitutes, as employed in the KJV translations of Genesis 6:22, Genesis 24:30, and Genesis 29:13.
154) In the event that the preposition “” might be an abbreviated form of Strong’s H3588 (
, kı̂y), words conveying stronger conditional or causal relationships, such as “because,” “when,” “if,” or “since,” may alternatively be considered in translation.
155) Genesis 9:3
156) Another possible interpretation of the blessing is that Noah was permitted to resume his omnivorous kosher diet during his post-flood blessing, although there is no text indicating that Noah was given any restrictions on carnivorous dining before boarding the ark.
157) The same blessings, multiplication, food, and dominion are described per Genesis 1:28–30 and 9:1–3. It is reasonable to infer that man’s dominion over animals was reiterated to Noah given man’s participation in the pre-flood corruption of animals per Genesis 6:12; see also Enoch 7.
158) Genesis 1:29-30, Genesis 9:3, Leviticus 11, Deuteronomy 14
159) The masculine pronoun also suggests preferential use of male animals for food or sacrifice, e.g., 1 Chronicles 29:21 and Malachi 1:14. Also, mothers are forbidden to be used as food, e.g., Deuteronomy 22:6-7. Mothers might also be understood to have the “blood of another” in them (as with human babies, cattle embryo blood types are determined paternally, thus it differs from the mother’s blood). http://www.ilri.cgiar.org/InfoServ/Webpub/fulldocs/X5443E/X5443E19.HTM
160) Author’s translation
161) Jewish Noahide laws to prohibit the consumption of blood or limbs from living animals are inferred from this verse, and Christians often associate it with Acts 15, which contains James’s prohibition to “abstain from blood.”
162) Post-slaughter blood draining methods in the written Torah are not defined in conjunction with any other texts that prohibit blood consumption outright, such as Leviticus 7:26, 17:10-14, 19:26, Deuteronomy 12:16-24, and 15:23; although Leviticus 17:13 prescribes that blood that is poured out is to be covered with earth.
163) Failure to promptly drain blood from a slaughtered animal results in meat spoilage.
164) Author’s translation
165) Exodus 22:31
166) Grazing animals such as horses do not fit kosher criterion per Leviticus 11, and they also eat fruit, which is contrary to Genesis 1 standards.
167) Acts 10
168) Per Genesis 9:28–29, 11:10–26, it is probable that Abraham knew Noah, given the Genesis lineages, life spans, and timelines presented. Jasher 12:63 and Jasher 12:69 imply interaction. See Joshua 10:13, 2 Samuel 1:18, and 2 Timothy 3:8 for Jasher references.
169) Aside from Genesis allusions cited herein, Jasher 1:19–20 alludes to Cain’s use of Abel’s animals for human food purposes.
170) A mild earth climate might be inferred from Genesis 1:7 or 2:6.
171) Genesis 3:7, 21
172) Leviticus 3:16, Psalm 66:15, Luke 15
173) Leviticus 11:1
174) Sequential chronology is assumed in the Leviticus 10 account. Some believe that Aaron’s sons were ministering in an impaired state per Leviticus 10:9; others suggest they were sober per Deuteronomy 29:6.
175) Matthew 5:17
176) Hebrews 5:6
177) Deuteronomy 18:15–18
178) Matthew 5:19
179) Hosea 4:6
180) 1 Samuel 15:23