וְ particle conjunction   רעע verb qal waw consec imperfect 3rd person masculine singular homonym 1   
2191.0 רָעַע (r¹±a±) I, be bad, evil. Denominative verb.

(2191a) רַע (ra±) evil, distress; also adjective, evil, bad.

(2191b) רֹעַ (rœa±) badness, evil.

(2191c) רָעָה (r¹±â) evil, misery, distress.

Cognate adjectives of the root r±± occur in Akkadian ( raggu "bad, evil") and Phoenician (Karatepe 1. 15 "evil men"; substantive "the evil" 3. 17). The root also occurs in Ugaritic according to AisWUS, no. 2533.

The essential meaning of the root can be seen in its frequent juxtaposition with the root ‰ôb. Thus Moses concluded, "See I set before you today life and what is good [ ‰ôb ], death and what is evil/bad [ ra± ] (cf. Mic 3:2). Frequently they occur in the merism that one distinguishes "good and evil/bad" (2Sam 14:17; 2Sam 19:35 [H 36]; 1Kings 3:9; Isa 7:15; cf. here "tree of good and evil, " Gen 2:9, 17).

Since the decision that something is bad depends subjectively on one's taste, the root frequently occurs with the formula "in the eyes of." Thus Isaiah threatens those whose moral judgment s are distorted: "Woe to those who call evil good and good evil." Because the Lord's judgment stands as a moral absolute, however, one can speak of objective evil, of sin. The formula ±¹´â h¹ra± b®±ênê YHWH "to do evil in the Lord's judgment " occurs frequently in the OT.

The root can have either a passive or active connotation: "misfortune, calamity," and "wickedness" respectively. It can occur in profane contexts, "bad" "repulsive, " and moral contexts, "evil" "wickedness."

The denominative verb, occurring seventy-five times with meanings ranging from "displeasing, injurious, " to be bad or evil [see above] inherits from its noun a dual meaning of being wrong in regard to God's original and ongoing intention and detrimental in terms of its effects on man. In some instances it may refer only to its injurious effects on man, either as physical or emotional harm to the person or as painfully unpleasant experiences. There are practically no philosophical or metaphysical connotations that bear upon theodicy or cosmology. The verbal forms of the root are basically descriptive of the interrelations between God and man and between man and man.

ra±a± designates experiences which entail physical pain (Num 16:15; 1Chr 16:22; Psa 105:15), or emotional pain (Gen 43:6; Num 11:10-11), in the case of Naomi the loss of family (Ruth 1:21; cf. 1Kings 17:20).

In the moral and religious realm of meaning, the verb denotes activity that is contrary to God's will. Bildad alludes to this aspect of meaning in Job 8:20, and the prophets Isaiah (Isa 31:2) and Zephaniah (Zep 1:12) state it more strongly. A phrase which highlights God's evaluation of action is "in his sight" which appears three times in relation to the verb (Num 22:34; Prov 24:18; Mic 3:4). Another way is to contrast r¹±a± activity with God's good acts (Josh 24:15) or with good people. The latter uses a participial form and is confined to the Psalms (Psa 26:5; Psa 37:9; Psa 92:11 [H 12]).

The range of activity associated with r¹±a± begins with rejection of God (Isa 1:4; Isa 9:17; Jer 7:26; Jer 16:12), particularly in the practice of idolatry (1Kings 14:9; 1Kings 16:25; 2Kings 21:11; Jer 25:6) and once the destruction of his holy place (Psa 74:3). Abuse of people and exploitation of their property is common. This includes causing physical pain (Num 16:15; Psa 22:16 [H 17]); harsh slavery in Egypt (Exo 5:22-23; Num 20:15; Deut 26:6), dishonesty (Gen 31:7; Gen 44:5, Deut 15:9), demand for immoral relations (Gen 19:7; Jud 19:23), verbal abuse (Psa 27:2), and efforts to kill (1Sam 25:34; 1Sam 26:21; Jer 38:9). In one case it involves a harsh oath (Lev 5:4) and in another King David's taking a census (but see p¹qad for possibility that this was a mustering of the troops-still sinful R.L.H.) of the people (1Chr 21:17).

The biblical writers take r¹±a± back into the inner sources of the acts. The people who do it lack understanding (Jer 4:22) of the true nature of their acts, yet go ahead and deliberately plan to hurt others (Prov 24:8). In fact it becomes a habit (Jer 13:23). More seriously, it becomes a compulsion (Gen 19:9; Prov 4:16; Prov 17:4). Part of their lack of understanding is their failure to realize till too late the injury they cause themselves (1Sam 12:25; Psa 44:2 [H 3]; Jer 13:23).

God is the subject of the verb r¹±a± in Psa 44:2 [H 3]; Jer 25:29; Jer 31:28; Mic 4:6; Zech 8:14), but his infliction of pain on people is not due to viciousness; it is the just judgment of sinners who do not respond to his call for repentance. In the Old Testament, God is not depicted as committing an immoral act when he does r¹±a± to the wicked.

Several times the Psalmist asked God to punish those who abuse him (Psa 64:2 [H 3]; Psa 94:16; Psa 119:115), but there were efforts made to urge, or even to challenge Israelites to face up to the way they ill-treat others (Lev 5:4; Josh 24:15) and to change their ways. Advice was given on how to keep from doing r¹±a± (1Sam 25:34; Psa 15:4; Psa 37:1, 8; Prov 24:19). Isaiah pointed to the future in which God promised that r¹±a± would not be practiced in his holy mountain (Isa 11:9; Isa 65:25).

ra±. Bad, evil (noun). The masculine noun ra± often is set in contrast with ‰ôb (good) as opposite poles of the moral spectrum. Sometimes sh¹lôm (peace) is given as its opposite. The noun is further defined as being that condition or action which in his (God's) sight is unacceptable (Jer 52:2; Mal 2:17; cf. Neh 9:28).

Starting with the purely secular meaning of the noun, one finds that ra± denotes physical injury (Jer 39:12), Times of distress (Amos 6:3 and the famous verse, Isa 45:7 "I bring prosperity and create disaster" NIV), but mostly denotes unethical or immoral activity against other people, whether by speech (Psa 41:3 [H 6]; Psa 73:8; Psa 109:20), by practice (Mic 2:1; Mic 7:3), or by offering improper sacrifices (Mal 1:8).

Twice ra± serves as an abstract of an inner condition (Psa 7:9 [H 10]; Prov 12:21; "wickedness"), but most often it helps depict inner attitudes toward either God or man. A person may plan, desire, love, and rejoice in ra± (Psa 52:3; Prov 2:14; Prov 6:14; Prov 12:20), or be apathetic (Psa 36:4; cf. Prov 28:4). ra± may be a refusal to respond to God's (Neh 9:35) which issues in an all-out surrender to this activity (2Kings 21:9; 2Chr 33:9; Prov 1:16; Isa 59:7).

The person whose way of life is characterized by ra± has a bleak future, if he continues in it. God is against him (Isa 31:2) and has declared sentence against him (Mic 1:12). Life itself is against him (Deut 31:29; Job 2:10; Job 30:26; Psa 54:5; Psa 140:11-12; Prov 13:17; Prov 14:22; Eccl 8:9).

Left to himself, an evil person has no chance of survival. But the God who is his judge is also the one who calls him to change his ways; it must be a radical action on man's part (Psa 34:15; Psa 37:27; Prov 3:7; Amos 5:14-15; Zech 1:4). This is a far more beneficial method than the legal method mentioned about ten times in Deut as a "putting away" ("purge" RSV) of evil. God promises that man's tuming from ra± will lead to a saving event (Job 5:19; Psa 121:7; Prov 19:23). Assurance is added to the promise (Psa 10:6; Psa 23:4) that this salvation is an actual experience of life, which can be tied to commitment (Psa 119:101; Jer 42:6). And there is advice on how to keep free from ra±. A person is told to keep from it (Prov 6:24; Isa 56:2; Jer 7:6), which may include a strong attitude of hating ra± (Psa 97:10; Prov 8:13; Amos 5:15). Above all, do not provoke God with idols (Jer 25:7).

ra±. Evil, bad (adjective).This form of ra± qualifies the nouns to which it is related, indicating the quality or the injurious activity of the noun. The noun may designate the lack of quality or the inferior quality of things or people which are thus unable to meet standards of value or function beneficially. In a secular sense, there are many illustrations of bad quality. First there were the ill-favored, lean cattle in Pharaoh's dream (Gen 41:21, 27), and the water which was unfit to drink (2Kings 2:19; "naught, " KJV; "bad, " RSV), and trade goods which one claimed was unfit to buy (Prov 20:14 ("naughty, " KJV; "bad, " RSV). In 2Kings 4:41 there is reference to something ("harm, " RSV) in the food of a cooking pot that was dangerous and which the prophet corrected. The adjective ra± may denote vicious beasts (Lev 26:6), angels which bring distress (Psa 78:49), famine (Ezek 5:16), diseases (Deut 7:15; Deut 28:35, 59; 2Chr 21:19; Job 2:7, Eccl 6:2). The term may refer to things which seem to function so as to bring distress, such as messenger reports (Exo 33:4; Neh 6:13) or wonders (Deut 6:22). Events (Eccl 2:17; Eccl 9:3) or the times (days) (Gen 47:9; Prov 15:15; Eccl 4:8) may go awry and be filled with distress. This adjective may designate displeasure (1Sam 29:7) or sorrow of heart (Neh 2:1-2; Prov 25:20).

More often ra± indicates moral deficiencies, moral qualities that injure oneself or others, or a condition that is below par. The measure of these negative qualities is God's evaluation (Prov 15:3) which is often couched in a phrase "in the sight of the Lord" which occurs about fifty-five times, mostly in the historical books. The term is also defined by being set in contrast to tob "good" about seven times. So people who disobey God are ra± (about eleven times) especially if they provoke God with idolatry (2Kings 17:11; etc). In some instances, ra± seems to denote the inner condition of such people (Gen 6:5; Prov 26:23, Eccl 9:3; Jer 3:17; Jer 7:24). Note the more abstract nuance of Eccl 9:3. Negative attitudes are labeled as ra±, i.e. pride (Job 35:12), resentment (Prov 15:10), resistance (Neh 9:35; cf. Psa 64:5; Ezek 13:22). Violence to others qualifies men's actions as r¹± (Deut 17:5; 1Sam 2:23; 1Kings 16:7; Ezek 20:44; Ezek 30:12).

God's response is not apathetic or whimsical. On the basis of adequate cause, God threatened and carried out judgment against people who had the trait of ra± (Ezr 9:13; Job 21:30; Prov 11:21).

But there is a brighter side to the situation. God also exhorted his people to turn from evil (Deut 13:12; 2Kings 17:13; 2Chr 7:14; Ezek 33:11; Ezek 36:31; Zech 1:4), and declared that the prophets' main task was to proclaim this exhortation and turn people back to God (Jer 23:22). The wise man gave a promise that the obedient would be free of ra± (Eccl 8:5). Here also advice was given on how to keep free from it (Psa 141:4; Prov 4:14; Eccl 8:3).

r¹±â. Evil, misery, distress, injury, wickedness. The feminine noun r¹±â functions much like the masculine adjective, though somewhat more frequently. Often r¹±â is an adjective too, and qualifies its nouns in terms of the negative function, or condition, and the injurious activity of the noun. God's own character and attitude measures the value of things and people (2Kings 8:12 Jer 29:11; cf. Jon 4:2, 6). The phrase "in the sight of the Lord" appears twice (1Sam 12:17; 2Kings 21:20). God's view deals mostly with moral qualities, but man has his own standards and tends to evaluate his environment as r¹±â in terms of the pain he experiences.

In a non-moral sense, things are counted as of inferior quality on the basis of their condition. The cows of Pharaoh's dream were inferior (Gen 41:3-4, 19-20), also land (Num 13:19), and the figs of Jer 24:2-3, 8 were useless for food because of their condition. Beasts were evaluated in terms of their danger to human life (seven references), so also the sword (Psa 144:10). Verbal reports, the times/days, events of life may be bearers of distress and so are r¹±â (some thirty-five times). The term may designate injury done to the body (over twenty times), or the sorrow one may experience (a dozen times). The feminine noun has the capacity to collectively denote the sum of distressing happenings of life (over twenty times).

This word r¹±â can label men (Num 14:27, 35; Jer 8:3) or thoughts (Ezek 38:10), but a number of times it is an abstract for the total of ungodly deeds people do, or a person's inner condition which produces such deeds. The term may label a variety of negative attitudes common to wicked people, and be extended to include the consequences of that kind of lifestyle.

In Jud 9:23; 1Sam 16:14-16, 23; 1Sam 18:10; 1Sam 19:9 the word qualifies the noun, angels, not to indicate that they were demonic, but that they brought distress, or an abnormal condition to the person affected.

In harmony with the contrast between r¹±â and ‰ôb "good, " God acts with painful punishment against the r¹±â kind of people (over seventy times; particularly prominent in Jeremiah). He also acts with mercy toward those who will respond to his exhortations (Eccl 11:10; Jeremiah ten times; Jon 3:8), but man must confess (1Sam 12:19; Jer 17:17). On his part, God' acts to save man from r¹±â (Exo 32:14; 1Sam 10:19; 1Sam 25:39) as he promised (1Kings 21:29; Prov 1:33; Isa 57:1; Jer 23:17; Jer 36:3; Ezek 34:25). And there was advice to the believers on how to keep themselves free from r¹±â (Exo 23:2; 1Sam 12:20; Prov 3:29; Prov 22:3; Prov 24:1; Prov 27:12).

rœa±. Badness, evil. The masculine noun rœa± occurs nineteen times in the OT; eleven of these are in Jeremiah. It refers to the poor quality of the cows in Pharaoh's dream (Gen 41:19), and of the figs unfit for food (Jer 24:2-3, 8; Jer 29:17). The noun denotes the sadness of one's heart (Neh 2:2) or face (Eccl 7:3). Once it points to negative attitudes (1Sam 17:28). Mostly the word denotes an immoral quality of man's activity (eleven times).

Bibliography: Buchanan, George Wesley, "The Old Testament Meaning of the Knowledge of Good and Evil, " JBL 75:114-20. Clark, W. Malcolm, "A Legal Background to the Yahwist's Use of 'Good and Evil' in Genesis 2-3, , " JBL 88:266-78. Eichrodt, Walter, Theology of the Old Testament, II, Westminster, 1967, pp. 380-495. Gelin, Albert, Sin in the Bible, Desclee, 1964. For ra± and synonymous terms referring to sin, see Girdlestone, R.B., SOT pp. 76-85. Porubcan, Stefan, Sin in the Old Testament, Rome: Herder, 1963. Quell, G., Sin, London: Adam and Charles Black, 1951. Richardson, Alan, A Theological Word Book of the Bible, London: SCM, 1957. Smith, C.R., The Bible Doctrine of Sin, London: Epworth, 1953. THAT, II, pp. 794-802. G.H.L.
0519.0 וָ (w¹), וְ (w®), וּ (û) and, so, then, when, now, or, but, that, and many others. (ASV and RSV similar.) The vocalization varies.

This is an inseparable prefix which is used as a conjunction or introductory particle which can usually be translated "and.".

The fundamental use of the prefix is that of a simple conjunction "and," connecting words ("days and years," Gen 1:14), phrases ("and to divide" Gen 1:18), and complete sentences (connecting Gen 2:11 with verse 12). However it is used more often and for a greater variety of constructions than is the English connector "and.".

It is often used at the beginning of sentences, for which reason the KJV begins many sentences with an unexplained "and." This use may be explained as a mild introductory particle and is often translated "now" as in Exo 1:1 where it begins the book (KJV, ASV; the RSV ignores it completely; cf. Gen 3:1; Gen 4:1).

The item following the prefix is not always an additional item, different from that which preceded: "Judah and Jerusalem" (Isa 1:1), pointing out Jerusalem especially as an important and representative part of Judah; "in Ramah, and in his own city" (1Sam 28:3), the two being the same place, hence the translation "even" as explanatory. When the second word specifies the first the construction is called a "hendiadys," i.e., two words with one meaning. For example, "a tent and a dwelling" in 2Sam 7:6 means "a dwelling tent.".

The prefix may mean "or" or the negative "nor", (Exo 20:10), or, if it connects opposing ideas, it may mean "but" (Gen 3:3; Gen 4:2). It may add an additional subject in a way not acceptable in English, "I will fast, and my maidens" (Est 4:16). The noun can also denote purpose as in English, e.g. "Divide and conquer." Used twice, the meaning may be "both... and" (Num 9:14). For "a weight and a weight" (Deut 25:13) is meant "different weights." It is used to connect two ideas in a proverb, "Cold waters to a thirsty soul, and good news from a far country" (Prov 25:25), that is, they are alike. These usages are not really different meanings of the conjunction. They derive from the fact that Hebrew is more paratactic than English. We subordinate some clauses and specify relationships. Hebrew often puts clauses and phrases side by side leaving the sense and juxtaposition to specify the precise relationship.

The prefix is often used to introduce a circumstantial clause and is better translated "when," "since," "with," etc., "Why is thy countenance sad, and (i. e. "seeing," "since") thou art not sick?" (Neh 2:2). The prefix is often to be translated "then" as a consequent introducing the second part of a conditional sentence, "But if he wash not..., then he shall bear his iniquity" (Lev 17:16) -the so-called waw of the apodosis.

A common use of this prefix is with a short form of the prefixed conjugation of the verb in a special construction with the letter following the prefix (usually) doubled. This form, generally called the "waw consecutive," usually denotes sequence in past narrative. But sometimes the action is not successive in a strict sense. It may denote logical sequence (cf. Gen 2:1; Gen 23:20; Deut 3:8) or action that is actually prior to the preceding verb, i.e. it functions as a pluperfect (cf. Gen 19:27; Num 1:48; 2Sam 12:27; 1Kings 12:13; passim). W. Martin refers to this last usage as "dischronologized narrative ("Dischronologized Narrative in the Old Testament," Vetus Testamentum, Congress Volume, Rome, 1968: 179-86). This use explains the apparent contradiction between Gen 1:24-26 and Gen 2:19. The latter passage means "and the Lord had formed.".

[The origin and even meaning of this waw consecutive has been much discussed. The treatment in GKC is in accord with that in S. R. Driver, Use of the Tenses in Hebrew. In brief, it says that this form is found only in sequences and it takes its meaning from the lead verb. A lead verb in the perfect will be followed by this form which represents a continuation of that past action viewed as incomplete from the standpoint of the past horizon. Similarly for the sequence of an imperfect verb continued by a waw consecutive with a perfect.

An alternative view was presented by Zellig S. Harris, The Development of the Canaanite Dialects (New Haven: American Oriental Society, 1939), pp. 47-49. He argued that this waw preserved an old Ugaritic past tense which by accident is similar to the newly-developed imperfect.

G. H. Gordon shows rather convincingly that the alleged old past tense in Ugaritic was identical with a form like the Hebrew imperfect. But it is admitted by all, that this preformative tense in Ugaritic had both a narrative past and an imperfect usage. R. Laird Harris (Introductory Hebrew Grammar, Eerdmans, 1950, pp. 33-34) would modify Zellig S. Harris's view to hold that the waw consecutive is a preservation of the old Ugaritic narrative meaning of the imperfect tense which was used in a past sense with or without the waw. In poetic Hebrew also the imperfect shows this narrative past sense with or without the waw. CL the sequence of tenses in Psa 18:4-12.

G.Douglas Young has argued that this waw is a reflection of Egyptian usage ("The Origin of the Waw Consecutive," JNES 12: 248-52).

A waw with the usual pointing (simple shewa) is used with the imperfect and called the waw conjunctive. The meaning of this form also is debatable. It does not seem usually to refer simply to the future-that would call for a waw consecutive with the perfect. Rather it normally throws the verb into the subjunctive and expresses result, purpose, volition, etc. It often has a cohortative "a" attached.

The same conjunction is used commonly in Ugaritic but apparently as a separate word, as it is often separated from the following word by a word divider. M. Dahood alleges also an emphatic, an explicative and a vocative waw (Psalms III, in AB, pp. 400402). R.L.H.]

Bibliography: Blake, Frank R., "The Hebrew Waw Conversive," JBL 63: 271-95. Meek, Theophile J., "Translating the Hebrew Bible," JBL 79: 328-35. Pope, Marvin, "'Pleonastic' W¹w before Nouns in Ugaritic and Hebrew," JAOS 73: 95-98. Young, G. D., "The Origin of the w¹w Conversive," JNES 12: 248-52. Wernberg Moller P., " 'Pleonastic' Waw in Classical Hebrew," JSS 3: 321-26. C.P.W.