==Even if? I think I’ve provided adequate indication that the two words, bara’ and ‘asah, did NOT mean the same thing, or have you come around?
There is no reason for me to come around, since I never closed-off the possibility that they have different definitions with respect to creation week. Although, GourmetDan’s point with respect to asah preceding bara in Gen. 1:26 strengthens the argument that they can both be used as standard synonyms —and/or— referrential synonyms.
==Let’s see if I do miss your point: If both (bara’ and ‘asah) were happening on any creative day then either (bara’ or ‘asah) could be used to refer to the same (same what?
Still not sure if you fully understand what I’m trying to say. My point is that since the Bible tells us that both happened on a given creation day, then either can be used to refer to said day. So even if we accept that asah and bara have different meanings, either can be used as referential synonyms to refer to a creation day where they both occured. For instance, if I went on a holiday that both involved water skiing and fishing, I could use either word to refer to the same holiday. As such, the use of asah and bara in reference to any given creation day in no way hinders a straigtforward reading of creation week where “evening and morning” are used in conjunction with an ordinal number attached to a specific day/yom. This language is a direct appeal to our own experience with respect to what is meant by “day”, where each day is defined by an ordinal number and “evening and morning.” To my mind, it is those who try to read-in long ages who are engaged in all the twisting and stretching.
==To argue for a possible language convention to explain a possible goal of avoiding word redundancy (something that would require an explanation of why the writer might want to do this) is stretching, yes.
I did some checking and discovered I am not alone in my understanding of how asah and bara are used with respect to creation week in Genesis. Although, I must admit others have communicated the idea much better than my feeble attempts to describe the same. As it turns out, what I was driving at is known as “Synonymous Parallelism.” To wit:
“A synonymous parallelism is where a thought is stated in one phrase and then repeated in different words in the next phrase. The following synonymous parallelisms show the equivalent meanings of bara and asah.
Genesis 2:4 This is the history of the heavens and the earth when they were created, in the day that the LORD God made the earth and the heavens.
Exodus 34:10 And He said: “Behold, I make a covenant. Before all your people I will do (asah) marvels such as have not been done (bara) in all the earth, nor in any nation; and all the people among whom you are shall see the work of the LORD. For it is an awesome thing that I will do (asah) with you.
Isaiah 41:20 That they may see and know, And consider and understand together, That the hand of the LORD has done (asah) this, And the Holy One of Israel has created (bara) it.
Isaiah 43:7 Everyone who is called by My name, Whom I have created for My glory; I have formed him, yes, I have made him.”
Notice that these examples strengthen GourmetDan’s argument that these words can be used as standard synonyms (not just referrential synonyms). I don’t pretend to have all the answers, but one thing is clear—neither asah or bara in any way hinders a straightforward reading of the biblical account of creation week in Genesis.
Does this have anything to do with Genesis 1 stating that animals came before man and Genesis 2 stating that animals came after man?
For example here is what is termed a synthetic parallelism, one in which the thought following the first expands and builds on it.
“Let the day perish wherein I was born, and the night [in which] it was said, There is a man child conceived.”
(Job 3:3)
Not only is Job lamenting his birth but also his conception, one thought expands upon the other but obviously conception and birth while related are not synonyms.
Another example of a synthetic parallelism:
“And he shall be like a tree planted by the rivers of water, that bringeth forth his fruit in his season; his leaf also shall not wither; and whatsoever he doeth shall prosper.” (Ps. 1:3)
Each thought builds on the one before but doesn't repeat it.
And then there is the composite parallelism:
“Blessed [is] the man that walketh not in the counsel of the ungodly, nor standeth in the way of sinners, nor sitteth in the seat of the scornful.” (Ps. 1:1)
Here ‘walk, stand, sit’ are drawn as parallels as are ‘counsel, way, seat’, with each word having a different meaning but expressing the same thought.
Here, though, is a synonymous parallelism:
“And Lamech said unto his wives, Adah and Zillah, Hear my voice; ye wives of Lamech, hearken unto my speech: for I have slain a man to my wounding, and a young man to my hurt.” (Ge. 4:23)
Lamech says, ‘hear-harken’, ‘slain a man-a young man’, ‘wounding-my hurt’.
Isa. 43:7 looks more like the composite parallelism of Ps. 1:1 above. ‘Called by My name’ and then ‘created for my glory’ then a slightly different thought ‘formed him’ and then ‘made him’.
Isa.41:20 appears to be a synonymous parallelism. Going back to the definition of constitutes a synonymous parallelism that you offered:
“A synonymous parallelism is where a thought is stated in one phrase and then repeated in different words in the next phrase. The following synonymous parallelism's show the equivalent meanings of bara and asah.”
But it fits more as a synthetic parallelism as, ‘see and know’ and ‘consider and understand’, then, ‘hand of the LORD ‘asah’, and ‘Holy One of Israel bara’.
Ex.34:10 has synonymous first and last thoughts with a contrasting thought in between.
Gen. 2:4 A statement of two that are not synonymous, history, generations not being synonymous with day, age, time.
“Notice that these examples strengthen GourmetDan’s argument that these words can be used as standard synonyms (not just referrential synonyms)....”
No. They don't as Strong’, Brown-Driver-Briggs, Gesenious,
Smith's Bible Dictionary, all attest that bara’ and ‘asah are Not the same, equivalent, or even nearly the same. Even my thesaurus shows the difference between “make” and “ create”.
You gave examples of parallelisms but they do not show that bara’ and ‘asah are equivalents nor strengthen Dan's erroneous and pointless statements.