First Word in the Bible more than we might suppose.

[Stravinsk]

For Christian language enthusiasts. Video purports to show that the first word in the bible says that Jesus is God and will die on the cross:

I found this extremely interesting.



Note: As a courtesy please do not move to Christian Theology (where it belongs) unless I can comment on my own thread as I am not allowed to post due to my identification as Deist.

Video titled "Hidden meaning of Jesus of Nazareth..." on the same video channel also highly recommended.

 

[Lamb]

That's very interesting. I had never heard before that there were two letters untranslatable as a word at the beginning of Genesis.

 

[Pedrito]

Pedrito finds something to be of extreme interest.

He finds it of extreme interest that the inspired, Holy Apostles, especially the Apostle Paul, one of the chief Hebrew scholars of his day, were so unaware of these important characteristics of their own holy language, and did not become appropriately aware of them even after their eyes were opened by the Holy Spirit.

It must be of comfort to know that God has opened the eyes of certain investigators in more recent times. Otherwise, we would never have known.

==============================================================================================

Let’s have a closer look at one of the propositions – that the “untranslatable” את 'eth (aleph tav) represents The Word (Jesus in His pre-human form), however expressed.

We’ll look at את 'eth (aleph tav) with respect to:
- Its linguistic significance;
- How Genesis 1:1 is often misrepresented in order to support the proposed point (which itself actually makes a point);
- Examples of how את 'eth (aleph tav) is actually used in Scripture (if there is enough space).

==============================================================================================


Linguistic Significance of את 'eth (aleph tav))


Strong’s H853 Strong: 1. (properly) self; 2. (generally) used to point out the object of a verb (or preposition) more definitely; 3. (hence) even or namely

Strongs H853 Brown Driver Briggs: 1. sign of the definite direct object, not translated in English but generally preceding and indicating the accusative

The general use is therefore one of clarifying the object of the operative verb – the thing being acted on. (That concept does not exist in the English language, just like the “of” in “off of” in American English does not exist in many other languages; nor is it found in the original, still current, British English – it is untranslatable.)

Genesis1:1 thus becomes “In-beginning he-created Elohim (God) אֵת 'eth (clarifying the object) the-heavens וְאֵת u-'eth and-(clarifying the object) the-earth.”
I.e. “In the beginning God created (clarifying the object) the heavens and (clarifying the object) the earth.”

Yes!... The אֵת 'eth (aleph tav) appears twice in Genesis 1:1! And that actually clarifies its meaning and significance. (Look two words to the left of the highlighted word in the video start screen in Post #1.)

==============================================================================================


How is Genesis 1:1 often misrepresented in this context?


How about: “In the beginning God (ALEPH/TAV) created the heavens and the earth.”

Ahah! Ignore one occurrence of אֵת 'eth, then move the position *change the positional significance* of the other occurrence, to support the proposition. Clever.

Didn’t Pedrito say above that the misrepresentation would itself make a point? And did it not?

==============================================================================================

The planned subsequent post will contain a few clarifying examples of אֵת 'eth usage, from the more than 6,800 occurrences in the Hebrew Old Testament.

 

[Stravinsk]

Thank you for your well articulated response, Pedrito.

A few clarifications I think need to be made. There are actually 2 main points illustrated in the video:

1) The usage of Aleph/Tav in the Genesis passage and the derived meaning from it's use there.
2) The ancient Hebrew pictographs of the letters of the phrase "in the beginning" which is arguably the "meat" of the video - seeing as it relates to the title of the video, whereas point #1 is an addition added beforehand.

To point #1, which you are addressing.

-Just using BLB - I found that this occurrence is not 6,800 times as claimed, but rather 22x: https://www.blueletterbible.org/lang/lexicon/lexicon.cfm?Strongs=H853&t=KJV

- You are correct in your explanation of it's linguistic usage in Genesis, as is outlined in Strong's definition - if the explanation given is the only one that could possibly apply.


Two immediate questions come to mind:

Question 1) In the Genesis usage - the Aleph/Tav is used as a term of clarity. There is an action : "created" done by the only named action taking noun in the sentence (God) - but apparently it's not enough to simply say "the heavens" "and the earth" - as the objects for which the verb "created" apply - but the Aleph/Tav needs to be added for clarity of those objects when no other action taking entities are present? (God is the only action taking noun in the sentence!). The Aleph/Tav addition is arguably redundant in it's usage here, unless it is a regularly used feature of Hebrew grammar to clarify objects of verbs (where no clarity is needed) - which brings me to...

Question 2) If such a term is needed to clarify the object of a verb in every instance - then arguably it would be used a whole lot more times than 22. Why isn't it?


Again - point #1 discussed above is an additional point to the video. Point #2 (the pictograph representation of the phrase "in the beginning") which follows relates to the title and main presentation the video wishes to make.

Edit notes: Grammar, thought fluidity and spelling corrections.

Post Edit thought: The Aleph/Tav as an isolated "word" is notably found in Zechariah 12:10 right in the midst of the phrases "and they shall look" (Aleph/Tav) "upon me whom they have pierced"

but not in the midst of the phrases that follow it: "and they shall mourn", "for him as one mourneth", "for his only son"....

 

[Stravinsk]

Further notes on Zechariah 12:10

If anyone who reads this bothers to look at the Masoretic Text for this passage - they will notice that directly preceding the Aleph/Tav אֵת (untranslated) is this word/phrase אֵלַי which means "My God". It is used by Messiah in Matthew 27:46 and can be found in the Hebrew in the passage it is quoted from:

Psalms 22:

אֵלִי אֵלִי לָמָה עֲזַבְתָּנִי רָחֹוק מִֽישׁוּעָתִי דִּבְרֵי שַׁאֲגָתִֽי


אֵלִי אֵלִי= "My God My God" (reading starting from right and going left, as Hebrew reads)

Zechariah 12:10 (snip)

"And they shall look, My God אֵלַי (not translated), Aleph/Tav אֵת (not translated) upon me whom they have pierced"

Hebrew below reads right to left:

וְהִבִּיטוּ אֵלַי אֵת אֲשֶׁר־דָּקָרוּ

 

[Josiah]

Interesting..... But I'd be cautious, much as I like this. As I listened to this, I thought of Charlie Brown who always saw all sorts of things in clouds... This MAY be more a case of eisegesis as exegesis. But again, interesting.

Thanks for sharing!

 

[Pedrito]

Pedrito thanks Stravinsk for his Post #4.

A few thoughts.

1. Pedrito would like to point out that he has edited Post #3 to improve the way a thought was expressed.

2. Knowing there wouldn’t be enough space to discuss the two main points in the one post (there wasn’t enough space to address even one point in one post), Pedrito chose to handle one main point at a time: “Let’s have a closer look at one of the propositions... ”. If Pedrito’s intention was not clear, then Pedrito apologises.

3. In the Interlinear Hebrew Old Testament (with Strong’s numbers) there are 6,809 “hits” with respect to Strong’s H853 את 'eth (aleph tav) reported, including normal variants (e.g. וְאֵת u-'eth (with the “and” prefix attached)).

Unfortunately the KJV with Strong’s numbers (for instance) ignores most of those occurrences. Both the TheWord and E-Sword programs report 18 “hits” in that translation. That count is actually a count of verses in which the H853 is found. A manual count comes to 22. Therefore there may be actually more than 6,809 individual occurrences of את 'eth (aleph tav) in the Hebrew Scriptures. (But Pedrito will use the number 6.800+ in any later discussion.)

==============================================================================================

Analysing just the first 4 chapters of Genesis, את 'eth (aleph tav) is found in: 1:1; 1:3; 1:7; 1:16; 1:17; 1:22; 1:25; 1:27; 1:28; 1:29; 1:30; 1:31; 2:3; 2:5; 2:6; 2:7; 2:8; 2:10; 2:11; 2:13; 2:15; 2:19; 2:22; 2:24; 3:8; 3:10; 3:18; 3:23; 3:24; 4:1; 4:2; 4:11; 4:12; 4:14; 4:15; 4:17; 4:18; 4:20; 4:22; 4:25; 4:26.

The story is similar in Exodus, Leviticus, Numbers and Deuteronomy. Beyond the Pentateuch (Torah), we find Joshua, Judges, Ruth… Wherever Pedrito has checked, a consistency is found. (Pedrito did not check every book in the Tanach (“Old Testament”), but.)

Pedrito did find in Genesis 4:1, את 'eth (aleph tav) used with he sense of “by means of” or “through”. However, the two occurrences in Genesis 1:1 clearly define the sense of usage in that verse.


Continued…

 

[Pedrito]

...Continued


With respect to the well expressed thought in Post #4: “The Aleph/Tav addition is arguably redundant in it's usage here, unless it is a regularly used as part of Hebrew grammar to clarify objects of verbs (where no clarity is needed)”, let’s look at a few verses regarding redundancy.

Genesis 1:4 (Interlinear Hebrew Old Testament with Strong’s numbers): H7200 saw אלהים H430 And God את H853 האור H216 the light, כי H3588 that טוב H2896 good: ויבדל H914 divided אלהים H430 and God בין H996 divided האור H216 the light ובין H996”

A more literal translation (from the Interlinear Scripture Analyser) is: “and-he-is-seeing Elohim [את 'eth ] the-light that good and-he-is-separating Elohim between the-light and-between the-darkness.”

Genesis 1:21: “and-he-is-creating Elohim [את 'eth ] the-monsters the-great-one and [וְאֵת u-'eth ] every-of soul the-living the-moving which they-swarm the-waters to-species-of-them and [וְאֵת u-'eth ] every-of flyer wing to-species-of-him and-he-is-seeing Elohim that good. ”

Now compare Genesis 1:1: “in-beginning he-created Elohim [את 'eth ] the-heavens and [וְאֵת u-'eth ] the-earth.”

Pedrito seems to detect a consistency of pattern.

==============================================================================================

And regarding “The Aleph/Tav as an isolated "word" is notably found in Zechariah 12:10 right in the midst of the phrases "and they shall look" (Aleph/Tav) "upon me whom they have pierced"

but not in the midst of the phrases that follow it: "and they shall mourn", "for him as one mourneth", "for his only son"....”, four thoughts can be floated.


The first is that out of 6,800+ occurrences, if a person wishes to, a person can find two occurrences on which to place an association with Jesus. (Only two have been mentioned.)

The second is, if those associations are real (and we have seen that in Genesis 1:1, the presence of two occurrences in the same context shows the association to be invalid there), the apostle Paul would certainly been aware of them, and would have used them to show how one occurrence preceded the Law and one was predictive in the context of the Law having been established, and therefore how they both pointed to the temporary nature of the Law. The Writer of Hebrews (if not indeed Paul) as well.

The third is that a more correct translation of the word order is: “...they shall look upon me” (Aleph/Tav) “whom...”.

The fourth is that the use of [את 'eth ] appears to be generally associated with a direct object of a verb, not an indirect object. In Zechariah 12:10 the [את 'eth ] precedes a direct object ("whom"). The absence of an [את 'eth ] preceding "spirit of" which is also a direct object, appears to be related to the structure of that portion of the sentence. Nuances of grammar in languages in which we can communicate, cannot necessarily be projected onto languages we are less familiar with. Less familiar languages can therefore seem inconsistent at times. However, the significance of [את 'eth ] when associated with a direct object, appears to have a solidity of significance.

 

[Imalive]

.

 

[Pedrito]

In Post #3, an aspect of Zechariah 12:10 was compared with a statement in Psalm 22.

Further notes on Zechariah 12:10

If anyone who reads this bothers to look at the Masoretic Text for this passage - they will notice that directly preceding the Aleph/Tav אֵת (untranslated) is this word/phrase אֵלַי which means "My God". It is used by Messiah in Matthew 27:46 and can be found in the Hebrew in the passage it is quoted from:

Psalms 22:

אֵלִי אֵלִי לָמָה עֲזַבְתָּנִי רָחֹוק מִֽישׁוּעָתִי דִּבְרֵי שַׁאֲגָתִֽי


אֵלִי אֵלִי= "My God My God" (reading starting from right and going left, as Hebrew reads)

Zechariah 12:10 (snip)

"And they shall look, My God אֵלַי (not translated), Aleph/Tav אֵת (not translated) upon me whom they have pierced"

Hebrew below reads right to left:

וְהִבִּיטוּ אֵלַי אֵת אֲשֶׁר־דָּקָרוּ

It is true that if one looks at the consonants only (and originally, Hebrew was written consonantally), we can get the impression that two occurrences of what looks like the one word, are indeed the same word.

But if we consider a parallel case in English (written consonantally), our understanding might be broadened. For example, if we look at the word “cr”.

Does it mean “car” “care” “core” “cur” “cure” or even something else? A name perhaps?

Add the vowels, and all becomes clear. Have a look at the small marks (vowel marks) under the “same word” in Zechariah and Psalm 22. Do Readers notice the difference?


In Zechariah 12:10 the word is Strong’s H413 = “to-me”. In Psalm 22 the word is Strong’s H410 = “God-of-me”.

==============================================================================================

Pedrito asks that his intention in pointing out the above, be not misunderstood. Pedrito commends Stravinsk for the efforts he is putting in to gain an understanding of God’s Holy Word in its wonderful depths.


(Of course, a logically minded person may well ask, if Jesus cried "My God, My God," (actually, “My God, my God, why have you forsaken me?”) when He was on the cross, was He calling to Himself, or to a separate Being?)

 

[Pedrito]

On Post #9, a list of names from Genesis Chapter 5 was submitted, together with suggested associated meanings. (Pedrito has seen various forms of the list in the past.) The list as presented tells a story.

The submitted form was a graphic. Pedrito reproduces the list here as a text list.

God………….The God
Adam………..Man
Seth………….is appointed
Enosh………..a mortal man of
Kenan………..sorrow is born!
Mahahalel…...The Glory of God
Jared…………shall come down
Enoch………..instructing that
Methuselah….His death shall bring
Lamech……...those in despair
Noah………...rest

The story is true. But has it been superimposed on (backward retrofitted onto) those names?

==============================================================================================

Let’s see. We’ll have a look at meanings from the Strong’s and the Brown-Driver-Briggs lexicons (translation dictionaries).

God…………..God, gods, magistrates, judges, rulers, divine ones, angels, god-like ones
Adam………...ruddy (i.e. a human being), mankind, Adam, the first man
Seth…………..put (i.e. substituted), compensation
Enosh………...mortal, mortal man, mankind in general
Kenan………...fixed, possession
Mahalalel……..praise of God
Jared………….descent
Enoch………...initiated, dedicated
Methuselah…...man of a dart, (others suggest something like “he dies and it (the flood) is sent")
Lamech……….powerful
Noah………….rest

==============================================================================================

Pedrito thinks he notices some significant differences.

Has he detected a degree of overenthusiasm?

 

[Andrew]

On Post #9, a list of names from Genesis Chapter 5 was submitted, together with suggested associated meanings. (Pedrito has seen various forms of the list in the past.) The list as presented tells a story.

The submitted form was a graphic. Pedrito reproduces the list here as a text list.



The story is true. But has it been superimposed on (backward retrofitted onto) those names?

==============================================================================================

Let’s see. We’ll have a look at meanings from the Strong’s and the Brown-Driver-Briggs lexicons (translation dictionaries).

God…………..God, gods, magistrates, judges, rulers, divine ones, angels, god-like ones
Adam………...ruddy (i.e. a human being), mankind, Adam, the first man
Seth…………..put (i.e. substituted), compensation
Enosh………...mortal, mortal man, mankind in general
Kenan………...fixed, possession
Mahalalel……..praise of God
Jared………….descent
Enoch………...initiated, dedicated
Methuselah…...man of a dart, (others suggest something like “he dies and it (the flood) is sent")
Lamech……….powerful
Noah………….rest

==============================================================================================

Pedrito thinks he notices some significant differences.

Has he detected a degree of overenthusiasm?

DHoffmann thinks that their are abundants of hidden messages from God in the word just waiting to be discovered.
Pedrito I once considered that to, so many meanings to these names. But if you are familiar with ghost writing you learn to fit it to make since as long as they are meaningful choices (that fit)
You can Adam - Red, Earthy, Dirt, Man... So we pick out which one fits to break the code.