MYSTERY OF THE HEBREW

[IamJoseph]

MYSTERY OF THE HEBREW


The Hebrew language origins mystifies. Research does not give any satisfaction of the process of its emergence - raising more questions than answers. Is Hebrew the first spoken language of which all others are its derivites?


1. It appeared suddenly - without a development stage track record.

2. It appeared in an advanced state - escaping the normal evolutionary process of languages. Even 2000 years later, the Latin was less advanced, eg: requiring four digits to express 17 (X, V, 1, 1), which the Hebrew dispenses with one single digital stroke!

3. It manages copious arithmatics in the millions with the ease of expression of today's most advanced English (sp: the consensus of millions of Hebrews in the desert); the dispensing of controversial subjects such as incest, homosexuality and bestiality are likewise dealt with in concise but comprehensive strokes of a few words while needing no expansion; its prose quoted by the greatest writers in history without any loss of relevance today.

4. It was introduced via the smallest, and certainly not the earliest or mightiest, nation.

5. It was a non-popular, non-pervasive and unknown language to the great empire surrounds and their civilizations: the Egyptians knew 70 languages but knew not Hebrew. Yet it evolved as the most quoted, printed and believed document in recorded history.

6. Archaeological summations of its prototypes (Sumerian, Phoenician) fail to qualify the criteria to any satisfactory levels: why the greatest volume of Hebrew but an absolute vacancy of these assumed earlier writings? Wherefrom the striking similarity between the older Hebrew and the Indian and Japanese scripts so afar off, since 1000s of years? Hebrew is similar to, and influenced most written languages today.

7. It introduced a new vocabulary and prose, with no record of past usage, of numerous words and concepts, deemed controversial for 1000s of years.


8. It introduced history and historical writings: akin to today's Telephone Directory, the first Hebrew book (The Torah) is brimming with specificity of names, places, dates, distances, cultures, diets, rivers, mountains which remain a yardstick. But for this Hebrew - the world would have no other source for the life and history of Abraham.

9. It introduced a Document (The Torah) - a summary of laws and statutes, many mostly new, to which none have been able to add to or subtract from: no other religion, ideology or figurehead gave the world a single law not already contained in this Document. Try to name a single new law outside the Torah? It remains comprehensive as a Law book without equal; the world turns by the Torah's 613 Commandments/Laws despite its ancient station in history.

10. It prevailed as no other, after disappearing and returning as no other. Apart from being the oldest alphabetical books in existence (The Dead Sea Scrolls), the Hebrew remained dead/dormant for 2000 years, and then returned circa 1940's as a living language/writing again. No other language ever did so after a period of 150 years of dormancy.


...The closest to expound any acceptable answers to the mystery of Hebrew, after much research, appears from a most unlikely, perhaps unacceptable source. In a book called THE MEDRASH, appears an entry relating to this sudden advent of the world's oldest surviving alphabetical writings. As a preface, the Hebrew is recorded as being a spoken language in ancient Egypt by the Hebrews, but not as a written one: there is no written Hebrew predating the Torah.

When THE TEN COMMANDMENTS were handed down to the Israelites via Moses (1250 BCE), its second Commandment prohibited the use of Graven Images (for worship). This would present a great contradiction: all writings of this period were in the Cuneiform ('picture writings'), made of animal/beast faces inter-polated with human torsos - or alternatively Human heads with animal limbs. This would clearly not be suitable for the Torah, which contained such a Commandment expressly forbidding Images.

The Midrash tells that Moses was thereupon given the means of transforming 'IMAGE' writings to 'ABSTRACT' writings - and the Alphabet was born. This is the only answer, which explains this mystery.


The above noted ten attributes of the Hebrew, which is unique unto itself and not shared by any other presumed prototypes, may have in fact been the precursor - not the derivative - of those writings. It is established that the Hebrews returned to Canaan 3250 years ago, equipped with the Hebrew books in their possession - thus they could not have received Hebrew from the Canaanites.

In Judaic belief, Hebrew is referred to as LaShon HaKodesh (Holy Tongue) - the Holy One spoke in this language. And there was no echo…

[IamJoseph]

Its an interesting point in itself, that of connecting Hebrew with the dawn of biblical humanity prior to the Tower of Babel period. This is difficult, if not impossible, to prove.

But we do have a document (Genesis/The Torah), which does report these events and periods, and this is reported in Hebrew - even verses of dialogue between peoples and historical figures are given, and names, DOBs and spouses & offsrpings of family generational threads listed for 1000s of years - a feat which would be difficult to emulate even by a Super PC today. As well, the mentioning of numerous historically evidenced places, peoples, kings, wars, rivers, cultures, distances, and 1000s of other specific items are listed with a specificity which makes any notion of myth incredible.

These all sound credible, contain no errors which contradict other historical findings - eg: no mention of the Greeks in Genesis, because this peoples did not exist then; no mention of tomatoes - because this fruit/veg was not discovered in that time; the diets and cultures of ancient Egypt are historically vindicated; the aerial view of the region is faultless; etc. So one cannot question its authentic foundation in truth and reality: truth is mostly seen where specifics, as opposed abstracts, are listed.

Its most standout feature is that there is no hsitorical report of any other language existing in that time between Adam and the Tower of Babel period - over 5000 years ago: the Babel event precedes the Pyramids, picture writings and even any record of an oral language apart from the recorded history of Hebrew. A diary is acceptable evidence in a court trial - so the Torah can well pass as an historical diary - and since it has no contemporary disputation - it is a legitimate premise the first language could have been Hebrew.

[IamJoseph]

Edenics

Introduction: What is Edenics?


Edenics is the study of the Ancient Hebrew language as the original language of mankind and spoken by Adam in the Garden of Eden. It is also the universal language of man until the division of languages at the Tower of Babel."

English Alphabet: The Hebrew origin of the English alphabet.

English Language: Hebrew words hidden within our English vocabulary.

The following articles are excerpts from Isaac Mozeson's work in the work of Edenics. For additional resources in this study, see Isaac Mozeson's Web Site at "www.edenics.homestead.com" and his book "The Word".

Introduction: What is Edenics?

Animal Names from Eden

The ABCs of Creation

The Word: The Dictionary that Reveals the Hebrew Source of English


The number of words in common between Hebrew and English is really amazing and this book reveals thousands of connections between the two.

What consequences can be derived if Hebrew is the first language - does it shed any renewed insight into the OT's credibility?

For more on this subject, which examines English and Latin a derivitive of Hebrew:

http://ancient-hebrew.org/bb/viewtopic.php?p=558#558

[Symptom777]

Originally Posted by IamJoseph

MYSTERY OF THE HEBREW

The Hebrew language origins mystifies. Research does not give any satisfaction of the process of its emergence - raising more questions than answers. Is Hebrew the first spoken language of which all others are its derivites?

Presumably you mean research by people who know nothing about languages?

1. It appeared suddenly - without a development stage track record.

It is derived from Caananite, which is itself derived from Ancient Egyptian.

[quote]2. It appeared in an advanced state - escaping the normal evolutionary process of languages. Even 2000 years later, the Latin was less advanced, eg: requiring four digits to express 17 (X, V, 1, 1), which the Hebrew dispenses with one single digital stroke![quote]No it didn't; it evolved from other languages. Arabs of course also had a better number system than the Romans, as did the Babylonians and Phoenicians. 17 in hebrew is two characters and three pen strokes, in arab numerals it is two characters and two pen strokes. Unsuprisingly, due to a better numbering system and more mathematical prowess, the entire world now uses arabic numerals.

3. It manages copious arithmatics in the millions with the ease of expression of today's most advanced English (sp: the consensus of millions of Hebrews in the desert);

Or indeed slightly less ease than arabic numerals, which have the added advantages that they (a) don't spell words, and (b) are not rearranged if the number looks "bad".

the dispensing of controversial subjects such as incest, homosexuality and bestiality are likewise dealt with in concise but comprehensive strokes of a few words while needing no expansion; its prose quoted by the greatest writers in history without any loss of relevance today.

Examples, please

4. It was introduced via the smallest, and certainly not the earliest or mightiest, nation.

Like, so what?

5. It was a non-popular, non-pervasive and unknown language to the great empire surrounds and their civilizations: the Egyptians knew 70 languages but knew not Hebrew. Yet it evolved as the most quoted, printed and believed document in recorded history.

Shame on it. In fact modern Hebrew is a resurection of a dead language, simply for political ends.

6. Archaeological summations of its prototypes (Sumerian, Phoenician) fail to qualify the criteria to any satisfactory levels: why the greatest volume of Hebrew but an absolute vacancy of these assumed earlier writings? Wherefrom the striking similarity between the older Hebrew and the Indian and Japanese scripts so afar off, since 1000s of years? Hebrew is similar to, and influenced most written languages today.

No it didn't. No-one bothered with it for centuries.

7. It introduced a new vocabulary and prose, with no record of past usage, of numerous words and concepts, deemed controversial for 1000s of years.

Examples, please.

8. It introduced history and historical writings: akin to today's Telephone Directory, the first Hebrew book (The Torah) is brimming with specificity of names, places, dates, distances, cultures, diets, rivers, mountains which remain a yardstick. But for this Hebrew - the world would have no other source for the life and history of Abraham.

That doesn't sound too bad, we'd all be better off without this data.

9. It introduced a Document (The Torah) - a summary of laws and statutes, many mostly new, to which none have been able to add to or subtract from: no other religion, ideology or figurehead gave the world a single law not already contained in this Document. Try to name a single new law outside the Torah? It remains comprehensive as a Law book without equal; the world turns by the Torah's 613 Commandments/Laws despite its ancient station in history.

Mobile telephones are not allowed to be used whilst driving a car.

10. It prevailed as no other, after disappearing and returning as no other. Apart from being the oldest alphabetical books in existence (The Dead Sea Scrolls), the Hebrew remained dead/dormant for 2000 years, and then returned circa 1940's as a living language/writing again. No other language ever did so after a period of 150 years of dormancy.

Dead sea scrolls are in Aramaic, not Hebrew.

...The closest to expound any acceptable answers to the mystery of Hebrew, after much research, appears from a most unlikely, perhaps unacceptable source. In a book called THE MEDRASH, appears an entry relating to this sudden advent of the world's oldest surviving alphabetical writings. As a preface, the Hebrew is recorded as being a spoken language in ancient Egypt by the Hebrews, but not as a written one: there is no written Hebrew predating the Torah.

The language content of the Torah is insufficient to sustain a living language.

When THE TEN COMMANDMENTS were handed down to the Israelites via Moses (1250 BCE), its second Commandment prohibited the use of Graven Images (for worship). This would present a great contradiction: all writings of this period were in the Cuneiform ('picture writings'), made of animal/beast faces inter-polated with human torsos - or alternatively Human heads with animal limbs. This would clearly not be suitable for the Torah, which contained such a Commandment expressly forbidding Images.

Although of course, aleph, is an ox head.

The Midrash tells that Moses was thereupon given the means of transforming 'IMAGE' writings to 'ABSTRACT' writings - and the Alphabet was born. This is the only answer, which explains this mystery.

Or that it was derived from older languages.

The above noted ten attributes of the Hebrew, which is unique unto itself and not shared by any other presumed prototypes, may have in fact been the precursor - not the derivative - of those writings. It is established that the Hebrews returned to Canaan 3250 years ago, equipped with the Hebrew books in their possession - thus they could not have received Hebrew from the Canaanites.

Established by whom, exactly? Those same people? Or simply by people sitting in armchairs and guessing?

Originally Posted by IamJoseph

In Judaic belief, Hebrew is referred to as LaShon HaKodesh (Holy Tongue) - the Holy One spoke in this language. And there was no echo…

My grandma always used the word kodesh and said it means killer. But I was talking to my uncle about it just the other day and he said it means tattle tale, to tell.

[Mindsweeper]

IAJ

I find that very interesting. Are you aware of any scholarly links from which I could learn more? bearing in mind that I have no understanding of Hebrew.

[Symptom777]

Originally Posted by IamJoseph

it is a legitimate premise the first language could have been Hebrew.

True, but you don't have to do much research to discover that the premise is false. Clearly a bit more than you can do, but not much.

[Symptom777]

Originally Posted by Mindsweeper

IAJ

I find that very interesting. Are you aware of any scholarly links from which I could learn more? bearing in mind that I have no understanding of Hebrew.

before you find it too interesting - realise this:

It's all completely cods.

[Mindsweeper]

Originally Posted by Symptom777

before you find it too interesting - realise this:

It's all completely cods.

Dear Symptom,

I shall not be taking your word for it. I prefer to assess for myself whether IAJ's claims for the Hebrew language is just "cods" or otherwise. I am sure he can direct me to links where greater minds than mine (and yours) have explored, and continue to explore the origins of language with specific reference to Hebrew. I know you may be a polyglot and/or a polymath, but I'm not yet convinced that your superlative knowledge exceeds the learning of every other Hebrew scholar on this planet.

[IamJoseph]

Originally Posted by Mindsweeper

Dear Symptom,

I shall not be taking your word for it. I prefer to assess for myself whether IAJ's claims for the Hebrew language is just "cods" or otherwise. I am sure he can direct me to links where greater minds than mine (and yours) have explored, and continue to explore the origins of language with specific reference to Hebrew. I know you may be a polyglot and/or a polymath, but I'm not yet convinced that your superlative knowledge exceeds the learning of every other Hebrew scholar on this planet.

MSweeper, if you refer to links which give a different take on the stanbdard history of languages - which end in a non-conclusion (as with the Bing Bang), IOW - links which point to Hebrew being precedent of Canaanite, I did post one:

http://ancient-hebrew.org/bb/viewtopic.php?p=558#558.

I will post others shortly.

[IamJoseph]

Originally Posted by Symptom777

True, but you don't have to do much research to discover that the premise is false. Clearly a bit more than you can do, but not much.

Would you be very upset if Hebrew was the first lingo

Here's an indication where English comes from:

We know that the greeks were not around in the Tower of Babel scenario - but their source point is listed in Genesis. Clearly, this manifests the awesome specificity of the Torah's historical truth: no Greeks then, but their source pointed out, challenges any notion this is not a true history, but unknown elsewhere by humanity - as with the story of Abraham. This also points to the Greeks' ancesters either knowing Hebrew or deriving it from the Edenites.

And Genesis lists a specific thread from Adam's generation to the generation of the Exodus via Shem, as it also lists the thread which culminated in the ancient Egyptians, then further down to the Greek nation which conquered Persia, which culminated in the Greek writings, which concluded in English via the Latin. QED - or do we have any credible, alternative disputation here?

[IamJoseph]

Symptom777


"Presumably you mean research by people who know nothing about languages?"

No, by the people who translated the world's oldest alphabetical books, discovered in Israel. That does not mean knowing nothing about languages - specially when the first examiners of the scrolls was limited to Christian scholars for 30 years - till East jerusalem came back to its original peoples in '67: the scholars were unableor reluctant, to release what they found for 30 years - while this was fully translated and dispersed on the net for the whole world to see, after its possession by Israel.

"It is derived from Caananite, which is itself derived from Ancient Egyptian."

Where are the 1000s of Canaanite and/or Egyptian books? We have Genesis which says Abraham met with the Pharoah, who gave him one of his daughters (Hagar) - a normal tradition in those days - where is this listed in ancient Egyptian writings? We have an ancient book (The Torah), which has a contemporary passage stating the Israelites entered Canaan after 210 years in Egypt, via a desert trek, with five books already in hand. The content in that book, namely its laws, have no relationship with either Canaan or ancient Egypt - but is in abject contradiction therefrom. This does have historical vindication: eg: both those nations were steeped in incest (daughter & sister marraiges), and Paganism?

"Or indeed slightly less ease than arabic numerals, which have the added advantages that they (a) don't spell words, and (b) are not rearranged if the number looks "bad"."

There was no arabic writings till 300 CE - which is some 2000 years after the fact? The Hebrew writings is a pristine and compact one - its alphabets containing numerical values: this is surely the only way a word of alphabets can also represent a numerical value - else the law, NOT TO ADD OR SUBTRACT, would never stand verification of any tamperings?

" Shame on it. In fact modern Hebrew is a resurection of a dead language, simply for political ends."

LOL> Yes, the Europeans invented or resurrected this dead language, to rob the Arabs of their land - the same Europeans who stole this land and exiled its original peoples for 2000 years - then invented PC Revisionism at the UN against that peoples it says are occupiers of thier own land! Do the Europeans know how to revive Hebrew - many can't even muster good english today? Yet the max any dead or dorment language ever came back is 150 years. Thus the resurrection of Hebrew some 60 years ago, after 2000 years, represents a unique advent in history - akin to a miracle, if its circumstances are examined.



"Dead sea scrolls are in Aramaic, not Hebrew."

Mostly, they are in Hebrew. Some later dated scrolls in that parcel contain some aramaic and also early Greek - which is historically vindicated becase both Greek and Aramaic were active 2000 years ago in Israel: but Hebrew being active predated these. The Dan Tel find, dated 2900 years, is wholly in Hebrew - this predates the scrolls by upto 700 years.


"The language content of the Torah is insufficient to sustain a living language."

Infact its the only language and writings which can sustain a living language. All its words and meanings are root-sourcable. Each word culminates in an extended word by the addition of related sylables - so if one takes away those again, it will arrive at the core original word - down to 3, then 2, than a single alphabet which evokes that sound and meaning. Like seeing, vision, sight, down to eye - they all stem from one alphabetic sound in its root.


"Although of course, aleph, is an ox head."

The Ox was named so by Adam - it was the first animal he named - thus the first alphabet?

"Or that it was derived from older languages."

But without any evidential books - when we should have 1000s throughout ancient history: what happened?

"Established by whom, exactly? Those same people? Or simply by people sitting in armchairs and guessing?"

There is no guessing here - the Hebrew writings display an historically verifiable thread for 1000s of years, and these items have cross-reference evidencing via 100s of historical factors listed. Where there are no other writings to verify, there are other means of verification - either by the lack of any contemporary disputation, or by other means - like the history and cultures listed of ancient civilisations. That the Hebrew is one of the most ancient writings is a given - by non-jewish scholars - down to it being derived by the first available alphabets, presumed to be Phonecian: so the only question debatable is if it was the first - or one ammediately derived from the first - that is the only Q here?

[Symptom777]

Hmm, first of there are egyptian writings fromm 3000 BC.
Secondly, the Torah itself includes references to the Egyptians writing to each other. So either Egyptian writing predated the Torah or the Torah contains a falsehood.

Thirdly, where are the thousands of any books? Books didn't get invented before writing, they got invented after it.

Fourthly the hebrew alphabet is clearly derived from heiroglyphics, aleph is an ox head. Your statment that the laws of moses created a new non pictorial language due to the commandment about craven images is clearly totally false. Either you made this up without thinking, or you quote it from some idiot source or else again this is a lie.

The torah is not an historical document it is a hotch potch of stories with no historical time-line.

[Symptom777]

Originally Posted by IamJoseph

Would you be very upset if Hebrew was the first lingo

Here's an indication where English comes from:

We know that the greeks were not around in the Tower of Babel scenario - but their source point is listed in Genesis. Clearly, this manifests the awesome specificity of the Torah's historical truth: no Greeks then, but their source pointed out, challenges any notion this is not a true history, but unknown elsewhere by humanity - as with the story of Abraham. This also points to the Greeks' ancesters either knowing Hebrew or deriving it from the Edenites.

And Genesis lists a specific thread from Adam's generation to the generation of the Exodus via Shem, as it also lists the thread which culminated in the ancient Egyptians, then further down to the Greek nation which conquered Persia, which culminated in the Greek writings, which concluded in English via the Latin. QED - or do we have any credible, alternative disputation here?

If you thinks that sounds credible then you're a fool.

[Symptom777]

Originally Posted by Mindsweeper

Dear Symptom,

I shall not be taking your word for it. I prefer to assess for myself whether IAJ's claims for the Hebrew language is just "cods" or otherwise. I am sure he can direct me to links where greater minds than mine (and yours) have explored, and continue to explore the origins of language with specific reference to Hebrew. I know you may be a polyglot and/or a polymath, but I'm not yet convinced that your superlative knowledge exceeds the learning of every other Hebrew scholar on this planet.

Unfortunately, no. Of course my knowledge does not exceed that of every Hebrew scholar. However it does exceed that of the "scholars" that IamJoking can direct you towards to support his fantasy.

His link for example directs you to the greatest hebrew scholar in the world today. Not. Namely I'maJackass himself.