Eclectic Topics in no Particular Order
Various Topics Discussed
/>
Someone wrote: "I've heard missionaries claim that their is a prophecy about Jesus in the very first word of the Hebrew Bible: Bereshit.
"They say the meaning of the letters in the word bet-resh-aleph-shin-yud-tav) are a code which is a hidden prophecy which spells out: 'the Son of G-d is destroyed by his own hand on the cross.' "Can you tell me if this is true or not?" First of all the first two letters -- bet / ב and resh / ר do NOT make up the Hebrew word "son" (actually "son of"). That is totally false. The Hebrew word for "son of" is בן (ben). בן (ben) is the noun and its smichut case is בן. Ben not bar... Bar / בַּר in Aramaic means "son of" but the word בְּרֵאשִׁית / b'reshit -- the very first word of the Hebrew Bible is not written in Aramaic -- it is written in Hebrew! Aramaic and Hebrew are two totally different languages. The T'nach (Jewish bible) is primarily written in Hebrew, but there are a few parts where it is written in Aramaic. The first few words of Daniel 2 are in Hebrew, but with the middle of line four it shifts to Aramaic and continues in Aramaic until the end of chapter seven when it reverts to Hebrew for the rest of the book of Daniel. There are also two Aramaic passages in the book known as Ezra-N'ḥemyah (Ezra 4:8-6:18 and 7:12-26), as well as one isolated verse in Yirm'yahu / Jeremiah (10:11) and the two words יְגַר שָׂהֲדוּתָא y'gar sahaduta (“evidentiary cairn”) in B'réshіt / Genesis 31:47, which is a direct translation into Aramaic of the Hebrew word גַּלְעֵד gal'éd. But there is no Aramaic in the Hebrew bible in chapter 1. These missionaries generally say these "definitions" are Hebrew -- when they are no such thing. They are Aramaic and don't match the Hebrew meanings of words spelled similarly. The meaning of the Hebrew word bar / בַּר is “pure” or “clear" (not son). So right from the start: lies. So what if the first two letters of b'reshit begin with a beit and a resh? How many words in English begin with the same two letters and have absolutely nothing in common? Consider the two letters "ch" as the beginning of words:
And those are just a few! It is the same in Hebrew -- and Hebrew uses prefixes and suffixes which are added to words to give additional meaning. When used as a prefix the Hebrew letter ב / bet can mean in, with, or by. In the first word of the Hebrew Bible the ב / bet is a prefix to the word reshit / רֵאשִׁית. With "b'reshit" the letter bet means "in" as "in the beginning of..." The beginning of "what" you might ask? The next word which is בָּרָא / bara. The first two words of the Hebrew bible are בְּרֵאשִׁית בָּרָא "at the beginning of G-d's creating of..." The word בְּרֵאשִׁית / b'réshιt has to be followed by another noun like "creating." The word רֵאשִׁית réshιt - "the beginning of [something]" - occurs 47 times in the T'nach, and it is followed by another noun in every case. Hebrew is also based on root words. The word reshit / רֵאשִׁית means "beginning of." It is a feminine noun. Masculine is רֹאשׁ / rosh (masculine noun) which means "head" as in Rosh HaShana -- the head of the year. So this person doesn't know the meaning of "son" in Hebrew or "head" for that matter! Neither of his claims hold up to basic Hebraic understanding! In Aramaic "bar" means son of and "resh" means head -- but once again B'reshit is HEBREW, not ARAMAIC. Also doesn't he say the first two letters mean "THE son"? Obviously that is wrong. In Aramaic the word for "the son" is בְּרָא (b'ra) not bar. In Hebrew the son of is הבן / HaBen -- the heh for "ha" being Hebrew in a prefix as "the." Then he says alef is G-d. Again -- total nonsense. אָלֶף [Alef] is the (feminine) name of the first letter in the Hebrew alphabet. אָלֶף [Alef] is generally not an actual word in biblical Hebrew, though it appears in the T'nach (bible) as a variant of the Hebrew word אֶלֶף [Elef], meaning "one thousand" (see, e.g., 1 Samuel 17:18, Psalms 84:11, 1 Chronicles 12:14). Moreover, there is the verb אָלַף [aLAF] used in the Hebrew Bible, meaning "to teach", "to learn". {The word אָלֶף [Alef] is also used in many later, i.e., more modern, Hebrew expressions.}. They probably get the idea that alef means G-d from their own Greek testament. The "alpha and omega" even among Christians is fairly new -- 19th century. The Textus Receptus (received text) was created in the 15th century used the Greek symbols "Α and Ω" (not "alpha" and "omega"). The Textus Receptus does not say "alpha and omega" (in words), but rather "Α and Ω". In the 19th century Delitzsch and Zalkinson (independently) translated the Christian bible into Hebrew. Both of them elected to translate "Α and Ω" into "alef" and "tav." BTW this whole lie is based on the idea that Hebrew is based on pictographs -- like Egyptian hieroglyphics. It isn't. The letter shin / ש symbolizes a flame. It can up to 5 meanings: 1. tooth 2. steadfast 3. change 4. return 5. year. But again -- Hebrew uses root WORDS not root letters. The next letter is a yud / י. The word hand sounds like the letter but it isn't the single letter -- the Hebrew word for "hand" is spelled יד -- a yud and a dalet -- not just the single letter yud / י. The letter ת / tav never ever meant cross. And again Hebrew was never pictographic either. The missionaries use a Canaanite alphabet where their letter resembles a cross and ignore the ancient Hebrew aleph bet version of ת / tav which looks more like an "x." There is a Hebrew word for "a cross" and it is צְלָב (tslav). There is no Hebrew word in the T'nach which depicts or resembles a cross. In the ancient k'tav ivri script the letter tav resembled the English letter "X". Missionaries love to use smoke and mirrors (which they call types and shadows) to try to find Jesus where he doesn't exist. This is a good example of this. In the Hebrew Bible prophecy is NEVER based on hints or "shadows" -- it is always based on plain meaning (p'shat). I discuss this in my blog fyi.
0 Comments
Your comment will be posted after it is approved.
Leave a Reply. |
Categories
All
|