Traditionally, the root ברא (B-R-') is interpreted to mean creation ex nihilo, and is attributed only to G-d. Of course, this interpretation reflects on the Judaism of the last two thousand years, and tells us nothing about what was intended by the author of the Genesis account.
Nevertheless, you do seem to have a point about 1:27. (And yes, בָּרָא bārā and וַיִּבְרָא vayivrā are indeed the same word. (Biblical Hebrew has this odd thing called vav conversus whereby prefixing וַ to a verb (remember Hebrew's read right to left, so it's a prefix, not a suffix) flips it between imperfect and perfect aspects: בָּרָא is perfect (denoting a completed action, hence roughly equivalent to past tense in languages with tenses), and וַיִּבְרָא is imperfect with vav conversus.)
I'll have a look into the origin of ברא further this evening when I can look at my Etymological Dictionary of the Hebrew Language. Ordinarily בדל (B-D-L) is used to mean "separate"—this is the case in v.4—but that is not, of course, to say that ברא might not originally have meant this.
To an extent the question is not what ברא might have meant, but what it meant at the time of the composision of the Genesis account. Though to an extent echoes of earlier meanings may still persist: Take, for example לֶחֶם leḥem, meaning "bread". The original, pre-Hebrew meaning of the word was any staple food, which is why בֵּית־לֶחֶם (Beth-Leḥem in Biblical pronunciation) means "house of bread" but بيت لحم Bayt Laḥm in Arabic means "house of meat"; but the echoes of the original meaning persist in, for example, Deut. 8:3 "man does not live by bread alone".
As for van Wolde's point about placing the Biblical account into the context of that of other creation stories; well yes, Genesis was the product of its time and society. But it only takes a glance at the account in Genesis versus those of other Middle Eastern societies to see how that in Genesis transcends its origins. The use of language may reflect earlier use by force of use (as, for example, the Deuteronomy quotation above is now proverbial in English), but that does not mean any putative earlier meaning of ברא persisted into the account in the Bible.
Finally, a point about the whole verse: As Jewish commentators have been pointing out for a thousand years, "in the beginning G-d created the Heaven and the Earth" is a mistranslation, as can be shown by the fact the Heaven and the Earth are not yet created in verse 2. A more accurate translation would be "In the beginning of G-d's creation of the Heaven and the Earth, the Earth was without form and void," etc.
no subject
Nevertheless, you do seem to have a point about 1:27. (And yes, בָּרָא bārā and וַיִּבְרָא vayivrā are indeed the same word. (Biblical Hebrew has this odd thing called vav conversus whereby prefixing וַ to a verb (remember Hebrew's read right to left, so it's a prefix, not a suffix) flips it between imperfect and perfect aspects: בָּרָא is perfect (denoting a completed action, hence roughly equivalent to past tense in languages with tenses), and וַיִּבְרָא is imperfect with vav conversus.)
I'll have a look into the origin of ברא further this evening when I can look at my Etymological Dictionary of the Hebrew Language. Ordinarily בדל (B-D-L) is used to mean "separate"—this is the case in v.4—but that is not, of course, to say that ברא might not originally have meant this.
To an extent the question is not what ברא might have meant, but what it meant at the time of the composision of the Genesis account. Though to an extent echoes of earlier meanings may still persist: Take, for example לֶחֶם leḥem, meaning "bread". The original, pre-Hebrew meaning of the word was any staple food, which is why בֵּית־לֶחֶם (Beth-Leḥem in Biblical pronunciation) means "house of bread" but بيت لحم Bayt Laḥm in Arabic means "house of meat"; but the echoes of the original meaning persist in, for example, Deut. 8:3 "man does not live by bread alone".
As for van Wolde's point about placing the Biblical account into the context of that of other creation stories; well yes, Genesis was the product of its time and society. But it only takes a glance at the account in Genesis versus those of other Middle Eastern societies to see how that in Genesis transcends its origins. The use of language may reflect earlier use by force of use (as, for example, the Deuteronomy quotation above is now proverbial in English), but that does not mean any putative earlier meaning of ברא persisted into the account in the Bible.
Finally, a point about the whole verse: As Jewish commentators have been pointing out for a thousand years, "in the beginning G-d created the Heaven and the Earth" is a mistranslation, as can be shown by the fact the Heaven and the Earth are not yet created in verse 2. A more accurate translation would be "In the beginning of G-d's creation of the Heaven and the Earth, the Earth was without form and void," etc.