@daWiiZarD It is not that I need to show "how smart I am," the point of this video is to show that Church Bandit is being very deceptive. He gives the impression he knows Hebrew, but as I point out in this video his method of "translating" proves that he is only using a concordance and "CANNOT" read Hebrew. This is a proveable fact. His deception is leading people away from the facts of the text in order to promote his belief system.
Now this interpretation I can accept even if I might not agree with it, as long as the grammar of the text is taken into account. Big ST fan myself :-)
Shalom Leafyboy: Here is a literal reading of this verse from the Hebrew; and YHWH will bring you back to Egypt in ships, in the road which I said to you, you will not again see it, and you will sell yourselves there to your enemies as servants, and as maidservants, but without a buyer. If you have any specific questions on this verse, please let me know. Jeff A. Benner
The Trinity concept is not of ancient origin and besides it is very Greek thinking, one of my biggest problems with the Trinity doctrine. Ancient Hebraic thought would NEVER conceive or even comprehend of a such as idea as it goes contrary to their thought processes. You point about Gen 1:26 is a good one and I have done a video on this verse giving my interpretation of this verse if you are interested. It is called "Let us make man."
TY KRU. I would like to point out that there is another Hebrew word for judge - shofet. I think the problem is that we try and insert our idea of "god" into the Hebrew language, but our idea of "god" does not exist in the Hebrew language. The word elohiym is one of great power and authority (human or not). With this understanding YHWH can be elohiym as well as Moses.
@Islandboyy02 We are looking at two different ancient languages, Hebrew (Microwave) and Sumerian (Toaster). If a person was an expert in "toasters" but not in microwaves, he would stick with toasters and not even attempt microwaves. Would you buy a microwave from this toaster expert who knows nothing about microwaves?
think you and why your at it can you eplain, what this big dill is about people saying, that the bible was in sumerian that is strange. and what dose the sumerian's have anything to do with babel
According to the vowel marker rules in Van Pelt’s book the first word is equivalent to “in beginning,” (unless there is some rule breaking exception I am not aware of). I can quote the text in V. P. if you’d like.
That would be correct, but Hebrew will rarely use the definite article (the) and is often required to be inserted into the English translation. For instance, in Gen 1:2 is the phrase ורוח אלהים (v'ru'ahh elohiym), which literally translates as "and spirit of God," but is always translated as "and the spirit of God."
Why is the word Ephraim (the son of Joseph) plural? Just because his name is plural doesn't mean he is more than one. In the same way Elohiym is a name that happens to be plural but the context of its use shows that it is a singular in the same sense the Epharim is used as a singular.
That is an interesting interpretation and does deserve some thought. However, if the author had intended this meaning he would have written אני המלאך אלהים אברהם which would be translated as "I am the messenger of the Elohiym of Abraham."
At 1:46 mn of this video, you speak about a free Bible program called ??? Please, can you write the name of this free program and where we can find it. Thanks
@dunklaw The prefix "ha" is used to identify something specific, much like our "the." This prefix can be used with singular or plural nouns, but "adam" is never used in the plural as the singular form can mean "a man" or "men."
@Islandboyy02 I do not know the Sumerian language, but I am proficient with the Hebrew language and if you read what I said above, I have read Mr. Sitchin translations of the Hebrew and it is very poor and if he translates the Sumerian language the same way, then I wouldn't trust it.
I’ve been watching your videos for some time now. I’ve noticed an inconsistency with the definition of berashyt. You’ve said before the it meant “in summit” and you have also said it means “in beginning “
Just one question. When you say that (ha'adam) means, specifically, The Man, but that (adam) can reffer both to man and mankind, is it possible, theoretically, that it could mean "the mankind", referring to a singular group. Much as in english we might say "the bookclub" or "the council" or "the paparazzi"? Basically, singular in the sense that there is only one group, but plural in the sense that this group incorporates all mankind? Not saying I agree with ChurchBandit, just wondering.
Thanks Achi, I have been enjoying your videos and books. What a help and blessing they have been to me, my family, and our klal. I agree that Elohiym can be used in a singular way, however there would be an order in a collective owning up to a singular authority, as in a tribal village, say in the Times of the shophetim. The shevet bet Av or patri-familias would have a singular authority over even the firstborn spokesman for the family or collective. For example Yohanan 1:1 "In the beginning was the word (Moshiach) and the word was with Elohiym and the word was Elohiym.... So you can have a singular and a collective plurality at the same time. Unless of course one takes an exclusive duteronomist or apostolic oneness view of Elohiym.
Let me demonstrate. The phrase in Genesis 1:1 is "bara elohiym." Elohiym is the subject of the vberb and the verb bara identifies the subject of the verb as third person masculine SINGULAR (not plural) - He (not they). If the author had intended for a plural use of Elohiym then he would have written bereshiyt baru. Before one can interpret the grammar of the Hebrew text, one must first learn Hebrew grammar.
@ancienthebreworg Thanks. It's just that the Koine "ho" can prefix a phrase or even a whole sentence as an amplifier and I just wondered if the "ha" could at any time have the same function?
it suck's when people use strong's as if it's perfect . you can't Just use strong's you have to know your prefixes, and read every definition of every single word and prefix'''!
@Islandboyy02 Let's say your friend was selling his car and assured you it was in tip top shape and you bought it. A day later it dies and it turns out the car was never taken care of and it cost you $1,000 dollars to fix it. You decide it isn't worth it to repair it so you have to junk it. The same friend here's about your problem and comes to you and says, I have another car, do you want to buy it? My question to you Islandboyy is, would you trust your friend and buy another car from him?
No, not at all :-). What I am saying is that the word Elohiym simply means one of power. YHWH is "one of power" and is there Elohiym. Also, Moses is one of power and is there elohiym. Also judges (shophet in Hebrew) are ones of power and are therefore elohiym as well. The problem is that we try and interpret the Bible through our own western perspectives when the authors of the bible think very differently than we do.
God is neither male or female but he does have the attributes of both male and female, so yes, the Spirit of God is feminine. I have no problem with that.
But let me demonstrate what I am talking about. In Genesis 1:1 we have בראשית ברא אלהים (bereshiyt bara elohiym). The subject of the verb is Elohiym, the verb is bara which identifies the subject of the verb as third person masculine SINGULAR (he). If the author wanted the word elohiym, the subject of the verb, to be understood as a plural, then it would be written as בראשית בראו אלהים (bereshiyt baru elohiym). Cont...
Mesta. If you are going to make a statement like then I will have to assume you understand Hebrew grammar. Is this true. The reason I ask is that you cannot make asumptions about Hebrew grammar unless you understand it. If you do not then I suggest you pick up a book on Hebrew grammar. Even an elementary school Hebrew grammar book will prove what I am saying.
Shalom Jeff, Where you refer to "ha'adam" meaning "the man". Does the prefix "ha" denote "the" as in the English singular sense or is it equivalent to the Koine "ho" which is actually an amplifier prefix which would be better indicated by using "MAN" - in bold capitals instead of "the man", therefore not associated with the subject being plural or singular?
in french we sometimes use a plural form of a word when addressing a singular person usually an elder or someone of great importance... its a high form of respect. we call it "le vous de politesse" elohiym
@emptiness2holiness Anyone who thinks "Elohim" means "people of the sky" has no concept of Hebrew whatsoever. This is a fabrication (a.k.a. fantasy interpretation) of Zecheriah Sitchin who could not even read one work of Hebrew in the Hebrew Bible. However, to give you the benefit of the doubt, can you give me one good reason why "elohim" could possibly mean "people of the sky?" By the way, the word elohim in Hebrew is אלהים and "people of the sky is עם השמים, No similiarities whatsoever.
Hey are you answering questions because i have a few... I would like you to explain and interpret correctly some verses for me, firstly this one: Deuteronomy 28:68 And the LORD shall bring thee into Egypt again with ships, by the way whereof I spake unto thee, Thou shalt see it no more again: and there ye shall be sold unto your enemies for bondmen and bondwomen, and no man shall buy you.
El - Singular Eliym - Plural Elo'ah - Singular Elohiym - Plural How does one interpret the following from Gen 26:24 - אנכי אלהי אברהם (anokhiy elohey avraham) Literally this says "I am the Elohiym of Abraham." Is Elohiym and I or a we? If the author meant "We are the Elohiym of Abraham" he would have said אנכנו אלהי אברהם (anakhnu elohey avraham).
Mesta, I think you misunderstood me. I stated that Elohiym is clearly a plural word but in its grammatical context it is "used" as a singular. This is very basic Hebrew grammar and no one who knows Hebrew would disagree with my statement. Cont...
Some of what CB states is true or at least a fair interpretations. I have a problem with his ignorant statements about the grammar of the verse, he obviously cannot read the Hebrew text and therefore has no clue about Hebrew grammar. While the Hebrew word bara is translated as create (which is usually interpreted to mean "out of nothing") the Hebrew word literally means to fill up which can be synonymous with asah which literally means "to do" (but often in the context of making).
Mesta, I am a big supporter of digging into the Hebrew text to better understand the meaning of the text to bring out a better interpretation. My problem with ChurchBandit is that his approach to this very deceptive and very biased. He claims to be looking at the grammatical structure of the verses but in reality he has zero understanding of Hebrew grammar. His interpretations attempt to support his theories regardless of what the Hebrew text says.
@ancienthebreworg Then I would assume that you are quite proficient in the language of the ancients. Can you tell me, if you can, a summary of the creation of mankind as you might know it according to the sumerians? Thanks :)
@ancienthebreworg Indeed you have made a valid point - as I would NOT trust to buy another car - but hear my point; this same person, as you say, though he has NO idea about cars, but is renowned for his expertise in TOASTERS, there I would certainly trust to buy a toaster from him.....
Jerry, where have you been all my walk with God, Elohiym? I suppose God knows when, and where He wants to lead me!, and what time I should get there! :)
@ancienthebreworg ... and this is what I'm talking about. Now, first of all, my intentions are not to annoy anyone, but - his method for translating Hebrew may be wrong - but Sumerian isn't Hebrew - so as wrong as Zitchin's method may be for Hebrew, U can't use his erroneous method to justify that it would be wrong for Sumerian as well.... mmm?
When did Israel ever go back into Egypt (in Afrika) with ships to sell themselves as slaves where noone bought them? Why would they go back to Egypt with ships when Israel shares a border with Egypt, and the Israelites had been walking in and out of Egypt? They walked into Egypt during famine, and walked out of Egypt during their exodus...
ELOHIM = judges, too. The only ONE able to seat in the judge chair is The Creator. When HE gives this similar authority to some men, they are called ELOHIM - doing the judgment over The Creator's people by HIS words, HIS Law. Just like when Moses was called "God" to speech The Word from The Creator to pharaoh and Aaron. It is about the position of this chain reaction works. The next thing I want to share here is that a god was always linked to his power over something or somethings - I mean, "the god of the seas", "the god of the mountains", "the god of harvesting", "the god of children", etc.. That's always "a god" linked to its "specialty". BUT when we read ELOHIM, we are reading NOT more than one "god" but the ALMIGHTY one GOD, The Creator. I mean, the ALMIGHTY, the single unique ONE that has absolute power over EVERYTHING. That's WHY ELOHIM. Not because HE IS more than ONE PERSON, but because HE IS above ALL things (and that includes, all split powers attributed to false "gods") in a unique single PERSON and GOD. Having in mind that "perfect" does not means "no errors", but "absolutely complete". And this is something that I never saw someone trying to explain. Am I wrong, Jeff?
And then it is very different in the original,ancient (very old) Lshana Ateeqa Supprayah (the language of God,he spoke to Adam and Eve in the Garden)of the original,ancient (very old) Assyrian-Aramaic/Aramaic of the original,ancient (very old) Ktav Ashurit, the older sister language of the original,ancient (very old) Ktav Ivri /Avri or original,ancient (very old) Hebrew... translated by a native born Aramaic speaking translator from Mesopotamia , Syria... Breetah in Ancient Aramaic or Genesis 1: 1. As the beginning, the Son of God creates the heavens and the earth.* 2. And the earth was for Him and by Him,* and the darkness was over the face of infinite space, and the Spirit of God was over the layers of the water.* Compare John 1:1-3 with these Footnotes:*1:1 John 1:1 "In the beginning of creation, there was the Manifestation. And that Manifestation was with God and God was the [the embodiment of] that Manifestation. *1:2.1 John 1:2 "This was in the beginning with God." Footnotes: John 1:1: [all instances] Literal Aramaic word retained: “Manifestation.” “Milta” or “Miltha” is an Aramaic word that has been set aside for only sacred use. Only the Messiah Eashoa is ever to be called the Milta. Grammatically, “Milta” means the essential connotation for a person or thing. There is no true English language equivalent for this word. The Greek Logos The word 'Milta' is translated as 'Logos' in the Greek 'Original.' What does 'Logos' mean in Greek? The term was used as far back as the 6th Century BC. Aristotle wrote about it. Subsequent philosophers wrote about it. The Catholics Jerome and Augustine wrote about it and made it into the holy word describing Jesus in the western tradition of Christianity. However, Milta is the original word that the writers of the Scriptures used to describe Eashoa Msheekha (Jesus the Messiah). Milta is more than 'the word.' It is more than a philosophical concept, describing Jesus as the spokesman for God. Eashoa is more than a spokesman in the Gospel of John.
If memory serves ... I think ChurchBandit teaches biblical Hebrew ... and he doesn't use Hebrew Concordances ... But if you feel the need to show us all how much you know ... feel free.
just stumbled on this and i never even seen what he is referring to, I might not be any Hebrew scholar myself, but that is terrible. cripes. wonder what kind of ego he is floating that nonsense on.
Doesn't ChurchBandit say his videos are directed @ people who use Hebrew Concordances & Lexicons ??? You sound like you just want to TOOT your own horn.
The KJV translators translated שמים in Genesis 1:1 in the singular (Heaven) because the other heaven (the expanse in the sky) was not created until day two (Genesis 1:7-8), Thus having 'heavens' in Genesis 2:1 logical. Do u now understand why same 'word' is Heaven and then Heavens?. Brother, the KVJ has no errors or contradictions like the NIV and the others have. I can show u many samples :)
Excellent demonstration of showing and proving with empirical evidence, objectivity, and fairness. All glory to YHWH, keep up the great work. Shalom
@daWiiZarD It is not that I need to show "how smart I am," the point of this video is to show that Church Bandit is being very deceptive. He gives the impression he knows Hebrew, but as I point out in this video his method of "translating" proves that he is only using a concordance and "CANNOT" read Hebrew. This is a proveable fact. His deception is leading people away from the facts of the text in order to promote his belief system.
Now this interpretation I can accept even if I might not agree with it, as long as the grammar of the text is taken into account.
Big ST fan myself :-)
Shalom Leafyboy:
Here is a literal reading of this verse from the Hebrew;
and YHWH will bring you back to
Egypt in ships, in the road which
I said to you, you will not
again see it, and you will sell
yourselves there to your enemies
as servants, and as
maidservants, but without a
buyer.
If you have any specific questions on this verse, please let me know.
Jeff A. Benner
The Trinity concept is not of ancient origin and besides it is very Greek thinking, one of my biggest problems with the Trinity doctrine. Ancient Hebraic thought would NEVER conceive or even comprehend of a such as idea as it goes contrary to their thought processes.
You point about Gen 1:26 is a good one and I have done a video on this verse giving my interpretation of this verse if you are interested. It is called "Let us make man."
Jeff A. Benner Tertullian invented Trinity only to reject it himself as idolatry.
TY KRU. I would like to point out that there is another Hebrew word for judge - shofet. I think the problem is that we try and insert our idea of "god" into the Hebrew language, but our idea of "god" does not exist in the Hebrew language. The word elohiym is one of great power and authority (human or not). With this understanding YHWH can be elohiym as well as Moses.
@Islandboyy02 We are looking at two different ancient languages, Hebrew (Microwave) and Sumerian (Toaster). If a person was an expert in "toasters" but not in microwaves, he would stick with toasters and not even attempt microwaves. Would you buy a microwave from this toaster expert who knows nothing about microwaves?
think you and why your at it can you eplain, what this big dill is about people saying, that the bible was in sumerian that is strange. and what dose the sumerian's have anything to do with babel
According to the vowel marker rules in Van Pelt’s book the first word is equivalent to “in beginning,” (unless there is some rule breaking exception I am not aware of). I can quote the text in V. P. if you’d like.
That would be correct, but Hebrew will rarely use the definite article (the) and is often required to be inserted into the English translation. For instance, in Gen 1:2 is the phrase ורוח אלהים (v'ru'ahh elohiym), which literally translates as "and spirit of God," but is always translated as "and the spirit of God."
Why is the word Ephraim (the son of Joseph) plural? Just because his name is plural doesn't mean he is more than one. In the same way Elohiym is a name that happens to be plural but the context of its use shows that it is a singular in the same sense the Epharim is used as a singular.
I would really be curious how you interpret "I am Elohiym of Abraham in Gen 26:24.
That is an interesting interpretation and does deserve some thought. However, if the author had intended this meaning he would have written אני המלאך אלהים אברהם which would be translated as "I am the messenger of the Elohiym of Abraham."
At 1:46 mn of this video, you speak about a free Bible program called ??? Please, can you write the name of this free program and where we can find it. Thanks
@dunklaw There are amplifiers for verbs, the paragogic nun and hey.
@dunklaw The prefix "ha" is used to identify something specific, much like our "the." This prefix can be used with singular or plural nouns, but "adam" is never used in the plural as the singular form can mean "a man" or "men."
@Islandboyy02 I do not know the Sumerian language, but I am proficient with the Hebrew language and if you read what I said above, I have read Mr. Sitchin translations of the Hebrew and it is very poor and if he translates the Sumerian language the same way, then I wouldn't trust it.
@Eyes2seeEars2hear That would be e-sword dot com.
I’ve been watching your videos for some time now. I’ve noticed an inconsistency with the definition of berashyt. You’ve said before the it meant “in summit” and you have also said it means “in beginning “
Just one question. When you say that (ha'adam) means, specifically, The Man, but that (adam) can reffer both to man and mankind, is it possible, theoretically, that it could mean "the mankind", referring to a singular group. Much as in english we might say "the bookclub" or "the council" or "the paparazzi"? Basically, singular in the sense that there is only one group, but plural in the sense that this group incorporates all mankind? Not saying I agree with ChurchBandit, just wondering.
Thanks Achi, I have been enjoying your videos and books. What a help and blessing they have been to me, my family, and our klal. I agree that Elohiym can be used in a singular way, however there would be an order in a collective owning up to a singular authority,
as in a tribal village, say in the Times of the shophetim. The shevet bet Av or patri-familias would have a singular authority over even the firstborn spokesman for the family or collective. For example Yohanan 1:1 "In the beginning was the word (Moshiach) and the word was with Elohiym and the word was Elohiym.... So you can have a singular and a collective plurality at the same time. Unless of course one takes an exclusive duteronomist or apostolic oneness view of Elohiym.
Let me demonstrate. The phrase in Genesis 1:1 is "bara elohiym." Elohiym is the subject of the vberb and the verb bara identifies the subject of the verb as third person masculine SINGULAR (not plural) - He (not they). If the author had intended for a plural use of Elohiym then he would have written bereshiyt baru.
Before one can interpret the grammar of the Hebrew text, one must first learn Hebrew grammar.
I got your point, and I love the way you pointed out the mistake he/church bandit made, tough but with said with respect.
@ancienthebreworg Thanks. It's just that the Koine "ho" can prefix a phrase or even a whole sentence as an amplifier and I just wondered if the "ha" could at any time have the same function?
it suck's when people use strong's as if it's perfect . you can't Just use strong's you have to know your prefixes, and read every definition of every single word and prefix'''!
@Islandboyy02 Let's say your friend was selling his car and assured you it was in tip top shape and you bought it. A day later it dies and it turns out the car was never taken care of and it cost you $1,000 dollars to fix it. You decide it isn't worth it to repair it so you have to junk it. The same friend here's about your problem and comes to you and says, I have another car, do you want to buy it? My question to you Islandboyy is, would you trust your friend and buy another car from him?
No, not at all :-). What I am saying is that the word Elohiym simply means one of power. YHWH is "one of power" and is there Elohiym. Also, Moses is one of power and is there elohiym. Also judges (shophet in Hebrew) are ones of power and are therefore elohiym as well. The problem is that we try and interpret the Bible through our own western perspectives when the authors of the bible think very differently than we do.
What is the website you recommend? I didn't catch it when you said it on the video.
That wouldn't be possible, if it were then the word would have four consonantal letters which does not occur in Hebrew except for about 10 rare words.
@ancienthebreworg What is the link to the free program you mentioned?
@Islandboyy02 uhhh, yep :-)
God is neither male or female but he does have the attributes of both male and female, so yes, the Spirit of God is feminine. I have no problem with that.
But let me demonstrate what I am talking about. In Genesis 1:1 we have בראשית ברא אלהים (bereshiyt bara elohiym). The subject of the verb is Elohiym, the verb is bara which identifies the subject of the verb as third person masculine SINGULAR (he). If the author wanted the word elohiym, the subject of the verb, to be understood as a plural, then it would be written as בראשית בראו אלהים (bereshiyt baru elohiym).
Cont...
What are your thoughts on the original, pre-edited translations done by Mauro Biglino?
learn hebrew people don't tack a preacher's word for it, or your gonna miss it''!
If god wanted us to know what he said we'd all be able to read the prime sources!
Mesta. If you are going to make a statement like then I will have to assume you understand Hebrew grammar. Is this true. The reason I ask is that you cannot make asumptions about Hebrew grammar unless you understand it. If you do not then I suggest you pick up a book on Hebrew grammar. Even an elementary school Hebrew grammar book will prove what I am saying.
@MrZetterlund777 I can't speak for Greek, but for Biblical Hebrew I have lessons on my website (link is on my channel).
Shalom Jeff,
Where you refer to "ha'adam" meaning "the man". Does the prefix "ha" denote "the" as in the English singular sense or is it equivalent to the Koine "ho" which is actually an amplifier prefix which would be better indicated by using "MAN" - in bold capitals instead of "the man", therefore not associated with the subject being plural or singular?
LORD translated in Hebrew is Ba' al (Satin) more times that not. Other times it means a title like King, Lord, etc.
in french we sometimes use a plural form of a word when addressing a singular person usually an elder or someone of great importance... its a high form of respect. we call it "le vous de politesse" elohiym
@emptiness2holiness Anyone who thinks "Elohim" means "people of the sky" has no concept of Hebrew whatsoever. This is a fabrication (a.k.a. fantasy interpretation) of Zecheriah Sitchin who could not even read one work of Hebrew in the Hebrew Bible. However, to give you the benefit of the doubt, can you give me one good reason why "elohim" could possibly mean "people of the sky?" By the way, the word elohim in Hebrew is אלהים and "people of the sky is עם השמים, No similiarities whatsoever.
Hey are you answering questions because i have a few... I would like you to explain and interpret correctly some verses for me, firstly this one:
Deuteronomy 28:68 And the LORD shall bring thee into Egypt again with ships, by the way whereof I spake unto thee, Thou shalt see it no more again: and there ye shall be sold unto your enemies for bondmen and bondwomen, and no man shall buy you.
El - Singular
Eliym - Plural
Elo'ah - Singular
Elohiym - Plural
How does one interpret the following from Gen 26:24 - אנכי אלהי אברהם (anokhiy elohey avraham)
Literally this says "I am the Elohiym of Abraham." Is Elohiym and I or a we? If the author meant "We are the Elohiym of Abraham" he would have said אנכנו אלהי אברהם (anakhnu elohey avraham).
@ancienthebreworg Sooo... you're implying that Zecheriah Sitchin may have misread or mistranslated the Summerian texts?
Mesta, I think you misunderstood me. I stated that Elohiym is clearly a plural word but in its grammatical context it is "used" as a singular.
This is very basic Hebrew grammar and no one who knows Hebrew would disagree with my statement.
Cont...
Some of what CB states is true or at least a fair interpretations. I have a problem with his ignorant statements about the grammar of the verse, he obviously cannot read the Hebrew text and therefore has no clue about Hebrew grammar.
While the Hebrew word bara is translated as create (which is usually interpreted to mean "out of nothing") the Hebrew word literally means to fill up which can be synonymous with asah which literally means "to do" (but often in the context of making).
Mesta, I am a big supporter of digging into the Hebrew text to better understand the meaning of the text to bring out a better interpretation. My problem with ChurchBandit is that his approach to this very deceptive and very biased. He claims to be looking at the grammatical structure of the verses but in reality he has zero understanding of Hebrew grammar. His interpretations attempt to support his theories regardless of what the Hebrew text says.
Trying to learn Hebrew
@ancienthebreworg Then I would assume that you are quite proficient in the language of the ancients. Can you tell me, if you can, a summary of the creation of mankind as you might know it according to the sumerians? Thanks :)
Thanks Jeff
Beautiful response. So true.
Strong's really confused alot of nice people.,Like some wasp in America knows Hebrew better than Orthodox rabbis..lol
@ancienthebreworg Indeed you have made a valid point - as I would NOT trust to buy another car - but hear my point; this same person, as you say, though he has NO idea about cars, but is renowned for his expertise in TOASTERS, there I would certainly trust to buy a toaster from him.....
Jerry, where have you been all my walk with God, Elohiym? I suppose God knows when, and where He wants to lead me!, and what time I should get there! :)
Thanks.
Good teachings
@ancienthebreworg ... and this is what I'm talking about. Now, first of all, my intentions are not to annoy anyone, but - his method for translating Hebrew may be wrong - but Sumerian isn't Hebrew - so as wrong as Zitchin's method may be for Hebrew, U can't use his erroneous method to justify that it would be wrong for Sumerian as well.... mmm?
When did Israel ever go back into Egypt (in Afrika) with ships to sell themselves as slaves where noone bought them? Why would they go back to Egypt with ships when Israel shares a border with Egypt, and the Israelites had been walking in and out of Egypt? They walked into Egypt during famine, and walked out of Egypt during their exodus...
ELOHIM = judges, too.
The only ONE able to seat in the judge chair is The Creator.
When HE gives this similar authority to some men, they are called ELOHIM - doing the judgment over The Creator's people by HIS words, HIS Law.
Just like when Moses was called "God" to speech The Word from The Creator to pharaoh and Aaron. It is about the position of this chain reaction works.
The next thing I want to share here is that a god was always linked to his power over something or somethings - I mean, "the god of the seas", "the god of the mountains", "the god of harvesting", "the god of children", etc.. That's always "a god" linked to its "specialty".
BUT when we read ELOHIM, we are reading NOT more than one "god" but the ALMIGHTY one GOD, The Creator. I mean, the ALMIGHTY, the single unique ONE that has absolute power over EVERYTHING. That's WHY ELOHIM. Not because HE IS more than ONE PERSON, but because HE IS above ALL things (and that includes, all split powers attributed to false "gods") in a unique single PERSON and GOD. Having in mind that "perfect" does not means "no errors", but "absolutely complete".
And this is something that I never saw someone trying to explain.
Am I wrong, Jeff?
And then it is very different in the original,ancient (very old) Lshana Ateeqa Supprayah (the language of God,he spoke to Adam and Eve in the Garden)of the original,ancient (very old) Assyrian-Aramaic/Aramaic of the original,ancient (very old) Ktav Ashurit, the older sister language of the original,ancient (very old) Ktav Ivri /Avri or original,ancient (very old) Hebrew...
translated by a native born Aramaic speaking translator from Mesopotamia , Syria...
Breetah in Ancient Aramaic or Genesis 1:
1. As the beginning, the Son of God creates the heavens and the earth.*
2. And the earth was for Him and by Him,* and the darkness was over the face of infinite space, and the Spirit of God was over the layers of the water.*
Compare John 1:1-3 with these Footnotes:*1:1 John 1:1 "In the beginning of creation, there was the Manifestation. And that Manifestation was with God and God was the [the embodiment of] that Manifestation.
*1:2.1 John 1:2 "This was in the beginning with God."
Footnotes: John 1:1: [all instances] Literal Aramaic word retained: “Manifestation.”
“Milta” or “Miltha” is an Aramaic word that has been set aside for only sacred use.
Only the Messiah Eashoa is ever to be called the Milta.
Grammatically, “Milta” means the essential connotation for a person or thing.
There is no true English language equivalent for this word.
The Greek Logos
The word 'Milta' is translated as 'Logos' in the Greek 'Original.' What does 'Logos' mean in Greek? The term was used as far back as the 6th Century BC. Aristotle wrote about it. Subsequent philosophers wrote about it. The Catholics Jerome and Augustine wrote about it and made it into the holy word describing Jesus in the western tradition of Christianity.
However, Milta is the original word that the writers of the Scriptures used to describe Eashoa Msheekha (Jesus the Messiah). Milta is more than 'the word.' It is more than a philosophical concept, describing Jesus as the spokesman for God. Eashoa is more than a spokesman in the Gospel of John.
If memory serves ... I think ChurchBandit teaches biblical Hebrew ... and he doesn't use Hebrew Concordances ...
But if you feel the need to show us all how much you know ... feel free.
God's name in Hebrew is YHWH (Yahowah)
Ha'adam
To reveal First Pathway Overpower chaos
AMUN-RA-ATUM
@ancienthebreworg My point exactly... Sumerian :)
just stumbled on this and i never even seen what he is referring to, I might not be any Hebrew scholar myself, but that is terrible. cripes. wonder what kind of ego he is floating that nonsense on.
ANOTHER INTERPRETATION ! DO YOUR OWN YOU LAZY FOLLOWERS!!
Doesn't ChurchBandit say his videos are directed @ people who use Hebrew Concordances & Lexicons ???
You sound like you just want to TOOT your own horn.
The KJV translators translated שמים in Genesis 1:1 in the singular (Heaven) because the other heaven (the expanse in the sky) was not created until day two (Genesis 1:7-8), Thus having 'heavens' in Genesis 2:1 logical. Do u now understand why same 'word' is Heaven and then Heavens?. Brother, the KVJ has no errors or contradictions like the NIV and the others have.
I can show u many samples :)
@ancienthebreworg What is this link to the free program you mentioned?