|
|
Learn Biblical Hebrew Online Hebrew ForumsBiblical Hebrew Forum |
|
|
Biblical Hebrew Forum |
|
 |
Shalom and welcome to ClassicalHebrew.com forum!
Sophia Tranefeldt who manages the forum, has a Master's degree, majoring in Old Testament Studies and Biblical Hebrew. She brings an eclectic background to the ClassicalHebrew.com program, combining extensive teaching experience in Biblical studies, as well as social work and volunteer work abroad.
Our forum is intended for you to post questions and thoughts concerning Biblical Hebrew. Your comments also help us to better understand what interests you best, enabling us to offer new services and make the online learning experience that much more enjoyable and productive.
If you have any questions regarding our courses, please contact our customer care
|
| Tranefeldt Sophia - Forum's Manager |
| |
Message |
Date |
 |
Hello. As a complete novice at this, I was wondering if you would be able to give a correct difinition of the name Israel. In the Strongs, the root word is Sarah, meaning to prevail as a prince. How does this tie up with God calling Jacob Israel (masculine,feminine. Many thanks
Add response Send message by mail print message
|
07/10/08 23:39:37 |
 |
Hi Allyson, shalom,
thank you for your important and interesting question!
The etymology (history) of the Hebrew name Israel has been much discussed. The most widely accepted theory of its meaning is that it is a theophoric name (containing the name of a deity) consisting of
'el - God
and the root
sarah (sin, resh, heh)- to contend, struggle.
This specific root only appears 3 time in the Hebrew bible and all of them occur in the context of the story in Gen 32.
The name Israel would then mean "He who struggles with God".
The biblical story in Genesis 32 is, in my opinion, one of the most exciting and at the same time most mystical and difficult texts in the Hebrew Bible. The story of Jacob struggling with a man that apperently is God himself (although this has been discussed, see further down for another explanation) and receives his blessing is definitely hard to interpret and understand and requires a lot of thought. Challenging - and exciting! The depth of the Bible is incredible and I am sure there is much to be learned from this story.
After the struggle with God, Jacob is given a new name (which is quite common in the biblical tradition when a certain person receives a new task in life, or when his or her life changes direction for some reason), namely Israel, "because you have struggled (sarita from sarah)with God and men and prevailed."
Jacob - meaning the trickster- becomes the man who struggled with God himself!
And this name became the name of the entire people of God- the nation of Israel, who has Jacob, i.e. Israel, as their ancestor.
The fact that Jacob was wrestling with God himself has ben difficult to accept throughout history. Especially since God had problems winning the game...There is another explanation saying that Jacob fought with an angel. This suggestion is supported by Hos. 12:4.
There are indeed many challenging and mystical things happening in this passage. Why did God (or the angel) have to break his hip and why won't he say his name to Jacob?
One thing is certain though - this happening is an important one in the history of the nation of Israel - why else would Jacob receive a new name as an outcome of it, and why else would the prophet Hosea write about it?
Best wishes from Sophia
Add response Send message by mail print message
|
10/10/08 15:17:21 |
 |
Hello I am curious if anybody knows if the word "sar" or the plural "sarim" is used to describe Michael the angel in Daniel 10:13. I ask this because in Daniel, Michael the angel is directly associated with resurrecting the dead, bringing moral regeneration and judging by the book of life in 12:1-3. He is called the "great prince" in 12:1 but merely "one of" the great princes in 10:13. In the link below regarding Daniel 10:13 it just says "sar" which appears singular instead of "sarim" but I am not sure that is correct. Is it typical for "sar" in singular to be translated as plural based on context?
I think it is an interesting question, because the New Testament authors make these same claims about Yeshua and he is dangerously close to being called an angel by Rabbi Shaul in Galatians 4:14. Shaul also says the voice of the arcangel will raise the dead (1 Thess 4:16) but Yeshua says this about his own personal voice in John 5:25. I wonder if the early historical community could have been thinking such a thing and perhaps intolerant people have ignored this?
Of course the orthodox Christians do not accept this idea, but I wonder if the historical Jewish believers in Jesus/Yeshua may have been thinking it. In the Christian gospels, Yeshua mysteriously claims to have been present with "the only true God" before the world was created, (John 17:3-5), in a passage that reminds of the "sons of God" witness to creation in Job 38:7.
Link: http://scripturetext.com/daniel/10-13.htm
Add response Send message by mail print message
|
29/09/08 04:30:03 |
 |
I don't mean to endorse any particular religious viewpoint here. I will not interpret any reply as being either affirmative or derogatory of any faith tradition. I don't personally belong to any organization, or attend group meetings that makes connects Michael with Yeshua. I have seen that opponents of the claim center on Daniel 10:13 so I thought I might ask about the Hebrew because I didn't see any "-im" or "-ot" plural ending although it seems clearly plural.
Add response Send message by mail print message
|
05/10/08 00:02:59 |
| |
Hi Mike,
the word sarim, princes, does occur in Daniel 10:13 to describe Michael. Michael is described to be "achad hasarim harishonim": One of the first/greatest princes. The word rishon means first, but can also mean great. In 12:1 another Hebrew word is used, namely gadol: big/great.
I am not sure about the connection between Michael and Jesus. Hopefully somebody else can give you some input on the matter.
Best wishes from Sophia
Add response Send message by mail print message
|
07/10/08 22:25:24 |
| |
While I wish to be respectful of any orthodox Jewish believers, I think it is fair to point out that Brownen Manning regularly transliterates haShem in her blog. Therefore I do have a question about theophoric names (containing Yah or Yahu as a suffix).
Do theophoric names of the Nevi'im such as Yirme-Yahu and Yesha-Yahu imply that there is a middle vowel sound in the middle of the divine name? I've seen many transliterations that end in "oo" sound. This would seem to give it three syllables instead of two.
While of course nobody can be certain, the consensus reconstruction of haShem has only two syllables. Yet some groups actively insist there must be three syllables because of transliterations of theophoric names ending with an "oo" sound. (I've also seen lists without it).
Are these vowels at the end of theophoric names authentic? Were they pronounced (e.g. Yesha-Yahu instead of Yesha-Yah) and therefore was haShem 2 or 3 syllables?
Does anybody even know really?
Add response Send message by mail print message
|
01/09/08 18:35:38 |
| |
Hi Mike,
thank you for your question.
The divine name has brought fascination ever since it was first articulated I am sure. It is impossible for us today to be sure of the exact pronunciation of the tetragrammaton, the personal name of God.
Even so, there have been qualified guesses. Most scholars believe that the tetragramaton is a two syllable name coming from the root “hayah” - to be - Some analyse it as a qal form of the verb. The name would then mean “the one who is” / “the one ever coming into manifestation.” Others take it as a hiphil form of “hayah” meaning “ the one bringing into being” / “life-giver”. Apart from the verbal analysis there are other factors pointing towards a two-syllable pronunciation. Two early Christian theologians, Theodoret and Epiphanius (4th and 5th cent. C.E) transliterated the divine name with two syllables when writing in Greek.
It is problematic though, just as you’ve pointed out, that we have two abbreviated forms of the divine name, -yahu and –yehu (often being used in compound personal names) in which the waw is pronounced as a vowel and not as a consonant as the two-syllable solution would imply (We also have the contracted form –yah.). Maybe the vowel was added to make the pronunciation smoother. Pronouncing a name that ends with a waw is very difficult. The same goes for names which begin with yahu/yehu – as Jehoshua. Instead of the waw (which would make the name impossible to pronounce) a vowel was added to make the pronunciation easier. But these are only guesses from my side.
I’m afraid I don’t have anything else to say on this matter. If someone else has something to add to the discussion, please do so!
Kinds regards from Sophia
Add response Send message by mail print message
|
09/09/08 00:37:32 |
| |
meaning for the sentence "Jehovah/Jah naam/neum ayish/ash tom(e) = Janmashtome", a festival of Hebrew origin and celebrated by the people in india settled over 2500 years ago freed from Koresh king of persia under the command of Jehovah, and prophacy of Jeremia and Ezekiel.Want more details.
Add response Send message by mail print message
|
30/08/08 12:08:33 |
| |
Hello Anand,
Janmashtomi is a Hindu festival celabrating the brith of the deity Krishna. I'm afraid I have never heard of a Hebrew origin of that festival. If anybody else knows something, please add a respons!
greetings from Sophia
Add response Send message by mail print message
|
03/09/08 13:28:56 |
| |
When I took the entry level test I noticed on difference in the phonetical spelling the "x", Israel and most english translate it with an "h". I took an Ulpan in Israel and lived there several years the "h" is used very common. I thought I would give you the heads up on this because it can be confusing.
Add response Send message by mail print message
|
25/08/08 19:36:50 |
| |
Hi Judy,
thanks for your message. I'm not sure what you are referring to when you write: "the phonetical spelling the "x". Does "x" stand for a Hebrew letter? In that case which? Could you please write again and specify a little bit more what you mean?
Thank you!
shalom /sophia
Add response Send message by mail print message
|
28/08/08 19:15:23 |
| |
Hi Kelly,
God has many names in the Bible. One of them is elohim, which means "God" or "gods".
The ending -im is a Hebrew plural ending. When referring to the God of Israel the -im ending stands for what we call a majestic plural - a plural that gives glory and honor to the noun. Elohim is also a term used for gods of other people. When used about them, the plural ending -im is a normal plural telling us that the noun is referring to many gods.
The personal name of the God of Israel is spelled yod, heh, waw, heh in Hebrew (see Ex. 3:14). This name is also called the “tetragrammaton”, a greek name meaning "four letter (word)".
Nobody today knows exactly how to pronounce this name. In Hebrew tradition, the name is pronounced adonai, meaning “my Lord”, to not acidentally break the third commandment:
You shall not make wrongful use of the name of the Lord your God, for the Lord will not acquit anyone who misuses his name.
Some Jewish traditions will not even use "Adonai" except when praying, and substitute it with other terms, e.g. HaShem (The Name).
You are also writing about Yeshua, which is the Hebrew name for Jesus. Yeshua comes from the Hebrew root yod, shin, 'ayin, and it translates "salvation", "deliverance".
Good luck with your research on this important subject! regards /Sophia
Add response Send message by mail print message
|
14/07/08 21:53:37 |
| |
Kelly, I am just a student of Hebrew at this website, but I would like to point out that Israel (the collective nation) is the Son of God in the Tanakh (or Old Testament in the Christian tradition). God speaks to Israel both in the role of a Father ("Israel my first born son") and a mother ("as a hen gathers her chicks") in the Bible.
Any descendant of a patriarch who fulfills a role does so on the ancestors behalf, so the children could be impacted by sins of the parents and vice-versa. This shows how important family was to the Israelites and how carefully they chose their mates based on loyalty and character.
Yeshua, like any Jewish person with the faith to claim it, is "Israel" the Son of God. The nation is the people not the geographic polity, therefore "Israel" can be dispersed among the nations, etc.
The question isn't why he claimed to be Israel, but why all Jewish people at the time did not do so also. I believe this is the stinging message of the story in John 10 when Yeshua is accused of blasphemy for saying this.
Of course, in the Apostles teaching of the New Testament, God both personally declares that Yeshua is the Son of God at his immersion with John, and "proves he is the Son of God with power" by raising him from the dead. Yeshua is both Israel and David by inheritance, being descended from that lineage by his mother. (In Christian tradition Yeshua had no personal sin, since God was also literally his Father by action of the Holy Spirit, whereas Miryam his mother was Israeli descended from David).
Add response Send message by mail print message
|
01/09/08 18:51:50 |
| |
hi, my name is terry yarbrough and i am studying Biblical Hebrew.i am confused on the vowel marks for
"e" sereq and segul,when they have matres lectionis.
when is the "e" pronounced as the "e" in
"let".and when is the "e" pronounced as the "ay" in the word "day". for your help.
terry yarbrough
Add response Send message by mail print message
|
01/07/08 02:53:06 |
| |
Hello Terry,
this question might receive different answers depending on whom you ask. When studying at a university in Sweden I was taught that there should be no difference in pronounciation between a sere or a segol with the mater lectionis yod and a sere without it.
Modern Hebrew, on the other hand, distinguishes between a sere (or segol) with mater lectionis yod and a sere (or segol)without it by pronouncing sere or segol with the mater lectionis yod as the diphtong "ay" (as in day) and the sere or segol without the mater "e" (as in let). (Note! No difference is made when "heh" is used as a mater; it is only the mater lectionis "yod" that creates a difference in pronounciation.) That means that many people who have been studying Biblical Hebrew in Israel prononus the sere and segol with a mater lectionis yod as the diphtong "ay". Teachers at Eteacher also distinguishe between the sere and segol with a mater yod and the sere and segol without it.
Hope this clear things out a litte!
Good luck with your studies! regards from Sophia
Add response Send message by mail print message
|
02/07/08 20:23:15 |
| |
What does Ishi, Baal, Baali, and Baalim mean?
Why didn't the Enlish translators translate these Hebrew words - and what name did the people forget in Jeremiah 23:27 - what is GOD name in English? Yah-wah in Hebrew? - Why is there so many bibles in English with difference translations? What is consider the oldest English Written Bible - who is William Tyndale? Do you know some of this question?
I received a dream 4 yrs ago - in I was told to GO TELL OTHERS OF GOD NAME - That I knew His Name. The name that I known from child hood from my mother was the name JEHOVAH which is printed in the Oldest Written English Bible - King James Version. Exodus 6:3, Isaiah 12:2 and Psalms 83:18 - please response - Thank you
dwight.norris@cox.net, 619-581-3346
Add response Send message by mail print message
|
17/06/08 10:15:03 |
| |
Hi Dwight,
That was a lot of qustions! J I will try to answer them all.
Ishi means “my man” or “my husband”. Baal means “lord” (earthly of heavenly) or “owner” or “husband” Baali is “my lord/ owner/husband”. Baalim is the plural form, meaning “lords/owners. Baal is also a name of glory given to some of the deities that was worshipped by Israel’s neighbours. In that way it was also perceived as a personal name for some of these gods. So for instance Bel, tha akkadian form of Baal, was the name of the greatest god of Babylon, also called Marduk (see for instance Is. 46:1, Jer. 50:2, 51:54). The same thing happened to the canaanite god Hadad, also called Baal, the god of thunder and wars. The Bible is full of condemnation against israelites who cannot tell the difference between worshipping the God of Israel and Baal.
I am not sure what you refer to when you say that the English translators didn’t translate these words. Are there some specific passages you are thinking of?
In Jeremiah 23:27 I think that “my name” is a metaphor for forgetting the Lord himself. I don’t think that the author is referring to a special name, but rather that he is using the word “name” as a picture of God, who the people keeps forgetting.
You are asking about the personal name of the God of Israel (see Ex. 3:14. ) spelled with the following Hebrew consonants:, yod, heh, waw,heh. This name is also referred to as the tetragrammaton, a greek name meaning "four letter (word)". It is often translated as the “Lord” in English translations. Nobody today knows exactly how to pronounce this name., that knowledge has gone lost. In Hebrew tradition, the name is pronounced adonai, meaning “my Lord”, to not acidentally break the third commandment:
You shall not make wrongful use of the name of the Lord your God, for the Lord will not acquit anyone who misuses his name.
The masoretes, who vocalised the Hebrew Bible about 7th –9th century C.E., put the vowels for “adonai” underneath the tetragrammaton, a shewa and a qamas (the hataf-patah, reduced patah, underneath the first consonant in Adonai, was changed to a regular shewa since the letter yodh, beginning the tetragrammaton, is a non-guttural, and needs no reduced vowel.). So the vowels of Adonai was put underneath the consonants of the tetragrammaton, implying that it should be read “adonai” and nothing else.
Add response Send message by mail print message
|
22/06/08 19:58:22 |
| |
The many English translations are due to many factors. Many translators are interested in giving an up-to-date translation that uses a modern vocabulary and a modern language. As a language changes, there is also a need for a new translation that is understandable for people who want to read and understand the Bible. Another thing that brings new translations is the fact that the on-going research in Biblical Hebrew and other Semitic languages gives us new tools of how to interpret the text. There are many passages that are ambiguous when it comes to interpretation and as the linguistic research advances the solutions on how to intrepret them might change. When our insight in the Hebrew language deepens, our translations and interpretations of the Bible changes.
John Wycliff often comes up when disussing the oldest English Bible. His translation was made over a period from 1382-1395. Of course there was a group of Bible translators who worked on this task, and Wycliff functioned as the director of the team. Now, eventhough Wyclif's Bible was among the first translations, there were, in fact, many translations of large parts of the Bible centuries before Wycliff's work. There is a very informative article on this subject on wikipedia. Check it out below!
William Tyndale was a 16th-century Protestant reformer and scholar who translated the Bible into the Early Modern English of his day. Tyndale's translation was the first English translation to draw directly from Hebrew and Greek texts.
Hope this answer is satisfying!
Best regards from Sophia
Link: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/English_bible
Add response Send message by mail print message
|
22/06/08 19:59:07 |
| |
I am under the understanding that the letter J did not in existence in Hebrew during Biblical times, and that the letter Y had been substituted by the letter J by the Greeks. Therefore the name could not properly be jehovah.
Add response Send message by mail print message
|
14/07/08 17:41:04 |
| |
Hello Georgette,
well, there is a letter yod, which was also used during biblical times. This yod is often translitterated with a "y". We pronounce it as the y in you. So the pronounciations is not like an English J, as in juice.
Now, the pronounciation Jehova is incorrect and built on a misunderstanding of the vocalisation of the Masoretes. Jehovah is an English reading of éÀäÉåÈä, the most frequent form of the Tetragrammaton éäåä, the name of God in the Hebrew Bible, in the text with vowel points handed down by the Masoretes. The Masoretes vocalised the Hebrew Bible about 7th –9th century C.E., and they put the vowels for adonai underneath the tetragrammaton: a shewa and a qamas (if you have some knowledge in Hebrwe grammar: the hataf-patah, reduced patah, underneath the first consonant in Adonai, was changed to a regular shewa since the letter yodh, beginning the tetragrammaton, is a non-guttural, and needs no reduced vowel.). So the vowels of Adonai was put underneath the consonants of the tetragrammaton, implying that it should be read “adonai” and nothing else. This was in order not to break the third commandment. So the prononciation Jehova is a misunderstanding of the vowels undeneath the tetragrammaton. These vowels are not to be read with the consonants yod, heh, waw, heh, as the people who started to pronounce the name Jehova, thought. Instead the masoretes intended us to change the consonants to go with the vowels and thus read Adonai.
Hope this clear things up!
Best regards from Sophia
Add response Send message by mail print message
|
14/07/08 22:15:06 |
| |
Pro 3:25 Be not afraid of sudden fear, neither of the desolation of the wicked, when it cometh.
The word desolation has many definitions, which one applies here?
1: deprivation of companionship; loneliness
2: destruction
Here's the Hebrew word for the english translation.
H7722
ùÑàä ùÑåàä ùÑåà
shô' shô'âh shô'âh
sho, sho-aw', sho-aw'
From an unused root meaning to rush over; a tempest; by implication devastation: - desolate (-ion), destroy, destruction, storm, wasteness.
Add response Send message by mail print message
|
08/06/08 23:32:07 |
| |
Hello Roger,
thank you for your question. Definitions of words are difficult, but at the same time fascinating...a specific Hebrew word often covers the use of two or more English words. It is many times difficult to find an exact English translation.
Just as you have already worked out, the noun sho'ah comes from the root shin, waw, alef having to do with devastation, ruin and desolation.
In this context I would say that "destruction" is a pretty good interpretation of this noun, it describes something that will be totally ruined. In chapter 3 the author turns to young men to give them advice. And in verse 21 and onwards he speaks about what will happen to a man that has found wisdom (3:13). He does not have to fear the destruction of the evil, because he is simply not one of them.
good luck with your studies! best regards from Sophia
Add response Send message by mail print message
|
16/06/08 00:13:12 |
| |
Will this course enable me to read and understand the Siddur (prayer book)? Does this course focus mainly on reading for pronunciation, or does it accomplish reading with understanding and comprehension.
Add response Send message by mail print message
|
24/03/08 02:17:48 |
| |
Shalom Greg,
thank you for your question. The course called Classical Hebrew A, our course for beginners, focuses on learning the Hebrew alphabeth and vowels, the basic paradigms of the noun and the verb and acquiring a vocabulary of about 450 words. The grammar will be taught within the framework of famous biblical stories.
Currently two courses in Classical Hebrew are being taught: Course number A and B. Course B is an intermediate course that builds a solid foundation for the fluent reading of prosaic texts.
Our courses do not only deal with pronounciation, rather we put a lot of effort in understanding what we read.
Participating in our courses in Classical Hebrew will definitely help you if you want to be able to read and understand the siddur, since many passages in that prayerbook are taken from the Tanach.
Good luck! greetings from Sophia
Add response Send message by mail print message
|
24/03/08 13:55:00 |
| |
Hi,
The advisor told me that there are only three levels of Biblical Hebrew and the websites states that there are five? Whose answer is correct? He also told me that the level D and E is the same as the Modern Hebrew, however, from the site description, they are totally different. May you clarify these information? At least I am expecting that the advisor's information is consistent with the web site or the other way around?
Add response Send message by mail print message
|
22/01/08 00:06:34 |
| |
Dear Wong Chun Kit Chris,
Thank you for you inquiry. Currently, we do have three levels of biblical hebrew. In the near future we will open rhe other 2 levels you were asking about. The content of level D&E of modern hebrew is totaly different than the biblical one; as stated in the course syllbos. I am very sorry that our advisor gave you incorrect information. for future purposes i can be contacted at tel#18003168736 or email gideon@hebrewonline.com
thank you and have agreat year
Gideon Rome
International Sales Manager
Add response Send message by mail print message
|
24/01/08 16:00:21 |
| |
First of all, thanks for your reply.
I am really confused about how many levels of Biblical Hebrew. In the site, there are 5 levels, A-E, but how come you said there are only three levels of Biblical hebrew? May you verify?
Add response Send message by mail print message
|
24/01/08 18:05:10 |
| |
Shalom Antonio,
Thank you for your question.
Luke is the Greek short form for the latin name Lucius or Lucianus, meaning "light" or "shining". In a Modern Hebrew translation of the New Testament Luke is called "Lukas".
Greetings from Sophia
Add response Send message by mail print message
|
14/01/08 12:56:56 |
|
|
|
|
