The origin of Christian names

busy.baci

Deleted
Joined
Jan 31, 2022
Messages
346
Reaction score
719
I've always wondered why the name Joseph is so wide spread in Latin speaking countries like Spain, Portugal and much of South America, they just love to use it like Jose and Josefina. It doesn't make sense to me for this name to spread from the territories of Palestine into the South America continent, but the opposite must be true, that the name Josef was spread in a circular radius from Spain and Portugal into other areas as the thread shows for the location of the father of Jesus, Joseph being in Galilea in Portugal as a portual city in the shores of the Atlantic Ocean.

Here are some interesting data about the adoption of this name by the local population of Portugal and Spain showing that this name is not of Jewish origin at all, but it was adopted by them like in many other countries:

Jose Spain.png
Jose Chile.png
Jose Catalonia.png

Behind the name - Jose
Some variations of the same name in other languages and countries from the same website.
Other Languages & CulturesYousef, Youssef, Yusef, Yusuf(Arabic) Youcef(Arabic (Maghrebi)) Hovsep(Armenian) Yusif(Azerbaijani) Joseba(Basque) Joseph, Joses(Biblical) Ioseph, Ioses(Biblical Greek) Yosef(Biblical Hebrew) Ioseph(Biblical Latin) Jusuf(Bosnian) Yosif(Bulgarian) Josep(Catalan) Ghjaseppu(Corsican) Josip, Joško, Joso, Jozo(Croatian) Josef(Czech) Josef(Danish) Josephus, Jozef, Jef, Joep, Joop, Joos, Joost, Jos, Sjef, Zef(Dutch) Joseph, Jo, Jody, Joe, Joey, Jojo, Josey(English) Jozefo, Joĉjo(Esperanto) Joosep(Estonian) Jósef(Faroese) Jooseppi, Juuso(Finnish) Joseph, José(French) Xosé(Galician) Ioseb, Soso(Georgian) Josef, Jo, Joschka, Joseph, Jupp, Sepp, Seppel(German) Iosif(Greek) Yosef(Hebrew) Josephus(History) József, Jóska, Józsi(Hungarian) Jósef(Icelandic) Jusuf, Yusuf(Indonesian) Seosamh(Irish) Giuseppe, Beppe, Giusi, Peppe, Peppi, Peppino, Pino(Italian) Iosephus(Late Roman) Jāzeps(Latvian) Juozapas, Juozas(Lithuanian) Josif(Macedonian) Hohepa(Maori) Josef(Norwegian) Josèp(Occitan) Yousef, Yusef(Persian) Józef(Polish) José, , Zezé(Portuguese) Iosif(Romanian) Iosif, Osip(Russian) Seòsaidh(Scottish Gaelic) Josif(Serbian) Jozef(Slovak) Josip, Jožef, Jože(Slovene) Yuusuf(Somali) Josef(Swedish) Yusuf(Turkish) Ýusup(Turkmen) Yosyp(Ukrainian) Yousaf(Urdu) Yusup(Uyghur) Issouf, Issoufou(Western African)
 
I've always wondered why the name Joseph is so wide spread in Latin speaking countries like Spain, Portugal and much of South America, they just love to use it like Jose and Josefina. It doesn't make sense to me for this name to spread from the territories of Palestine into the South America continent, but the opposite must be true, that the name Josef was spread in a circular radius from Spain and Portugal into other areas as the thread shows for the location of the father of Jesus, Joseph being in Galilea in Portugal as a portual city in the shores of the Atlantic Ocean.

Here are some interesting data about the adoption of this name by the local population of Portugal and Spain showing that this name is not of Jewish origin at all, but it was adopted by them like in many other countries:
Some variations of the same name in other languages and countries from the same website.
It would make a lot more sense if more people understood that the area of Spain, Southern France, and likely Italy were all known as MDY at a point in time. This matters because MDY is transliterated “Medes” in the Old Testament. Thus, when the king of AShUR (Assyria) carried off much of the Northern House of Israel (who were largely represented by Ephraim and Manasseh: Joseph’s sons) to the cities of the “Medes” it was to this area of Southern Europe. The captivity in the Bible is called GLE or GL, ie “Gaul.” This is why you see the Gauls appear from “nowhere” in Southern France and why the western ports of Spain are “Portu-GAUL.” Spain had variations of MDY all over it including Madrid, Madian Islands, and the Mediterranean area, as in “the land of MDY.” This understanding of MDY “Medes” being Southern Europe and PRS “Persia” being Northern Europe helps to understand a great many things.
 
Last edited:
I think it's the diaspora, not the captivity: Galus

The Hebrew word can be said in two forms:
Gola גולה
Galut גלות

In its essence it means 'exile', being removed from place. Over the years it began to describe the Jewish diaspora.
I dont think it can relate to Gaul.
You can use the word in ordinary sentences. ("He was exiled from there").
I've always wondered why the name Joseph is so wide spread in Latin speaking countries like Spain, Portugal and much of South America, they just love to use it like Jose and Josefina.
Would you say the name variation is more common there than in non Latin places? You'd need to check the level of occurrence between them. Nonetheless it is common indeed.
It doesn't make sense to me for this name to spread from the territories of Palestine into the South America continent, but the opposite must be true, that the name Josef was spread in a circular radius from Spain and Portugal into other areas
I'd support the idea that the name is not from the Levant, just like most Biblical names, but Yosef specifically could originate from Hebrew.

The given etymology in the Bible makes sense. Yosef in Hebrew means "will add" , make more, continue, etc.
The story says Rachel prayed to God for another son, and that's why she named him Yosef.
I did not encounter an etymological explanation other than in Hebrew.
Some variations of the same name in other languages and countries from the same website.

Most of these variations can be grouped together.
If we continue with the idea that Yosef is originally in Hebrew, we can examine where is the closest forms.

The Islamic regions, allegedly closest to the biblical geography, use Yusuf. In comon Arabic the vowels O and E aren't in use, therefore Yosef must be converted to Yusuf.

In Greek, German, Dutch, Czech we find the identical Yosef, just with accent variation (S=Z for example).
In fact the Romance languages show a bigger variation than the 'original'. In Spanish the Y and F are not even pronounced accordingly.

I would then place Yosef further north than Spain. But of course, the closeness to Hebrew does not prove anything.
 
Last edited:
The Hebrew word can be said in two forms:
Gola גולה
Galut גלות

In its essence it means 'exile', being removed from place. Over the years it began to describe the Jewish diaspora.
I dont think it can relate to Gaul.
You can use the word in ordinary sentences. ("He was exiled from there").

Would you say the name variation is more common there than in non Latin places? You'd need to check the level of occurrence between them. Nonetheless it is common indeed.

I'd support the idea that the name is not from the Levant, just like most Biblical names, but Yosef specifically could originate from Hebrew.

The given etymology in the Bible makes sense. Yosef in Hebrew means "will add" , make more, continue, etc.
The story says Rachel prayed to God for another son, and that's why she named him Yosef.
I did not encounter an etymological explanation other than in Hebrew.


Most of these variations can be grouped together.
If we continue with the idea that Yosef is originally in Hebrew, we can examine where is the closest forms.

The Islamic regions, allegedly closest to the biblical geography, use Yusuf. In comon Arabic the vowels O and E aren't in use, therefore Yosef must be converted to Yusuf.

In Greek, German, Dutch, Czech we find the identical Yosef, just with accent variation (S=Z for example).
In fact the Romance languages show a bigger variation than the 'original'. In Spanish the Y and F are not even pronounced accordingly.

I would then place Yosef further north than Spain. But of course, the closeness to Hebrew does not prove anything.
The word "Jew" is not in the Bible. Plus, GL is found in many more forms than above. It can be used as "wave," with the implication of "carried away." Back to "Jew." What is a "Jew?" Jew is said to be a truncation of the Judah of the Old AND New Testament - YEUDE and Ioudaios respectively. If then "Jew" is to be "Judah," which "Jew?" The Sephardim, the Ashkenazim, or the Mizrahim? The Ashkenazim only recently entered into public conscious as "Jew." This also concerning Mizrahim. The Sephardics before them were white men, of a different race than Mizrahim and Ashkenazim. The Mizrahim and Ashkenazim are also quite different ethnologically. There are specific law in the Law and Prophets regarding procreation, and if procreation happens outside the 12 tribes that offspring is not considered "Israel" until bred back in for 2 additional generations. This means that Israel (which includes Judah) would be near homogeneous in their ethnological profile. So which one of those three clearly distinct people get to be "Judah?"
I think it's the diaspora, not the captivity: Galus
1662548615969.png
 
Would you say the name variation is more common there than in non Latin places? You'd need to check the level of occurrence between them. Nonetheless it is common indeed.
I don't have all the data to claim that the use of the name Joseph is more common in Latin speaking countries than elsewhere, all I used was just a website to show that indeed it is very common. That is from what little I know of my own, of course a detailed research about the percentage and the time-frame of that specific name being in use in those countries would shed far more detailed information and a clear judgement on that.

But that was just a name, what about the name Mary? I know that name also has the corresponding of it in Hebrew as Myriam, but that in itself might mean a lot of things. Either it is a original Hebrew name that only them used and keep using it, or, it's just a name that a part of the Jewish population picked up and twisted a bit from the host country where were they living, prior to the foundation of Israel. It's very common for migrants to pick up and use language, customs, traditions and naming of new borns from the host country in order to blend in and form marriages, it's just human nature. We want to be accepted in different communities if we're a minority, especially if the staying has been in the time span of hundreds of years, it's just inevitable.

I'd expect from the top of my head the most common Hebrew names to be after the characters of the Old Testament, like the angels for example:

Abatur, Adathan, Aglibol, Ananiel, Anush, Arakiel, Arariel, Adriel, Ariel, Armaros, Artiya'il, Asbeel, Asmodel, Azazel, Azrael, Barachiel, Baraqiel, Batariel, Beburos, Bezaliel, Bihram Rabba, Camael, Cambiel, Cassiel;

Chamuel, Chazaqiel, Daniel, Dadrail, Dumah, Eleleth, Gabriel, Gadreel, Hadraniel, Hahasiah, Hanibal, Haniel, Harut, Hashmal, Hamalat al-Arsh, Hibil Ziwa, Hofniel, Imamiah, Ieshim, Israfil;

Jegudiel, Jehoel, Jequn, Jerahmeel, Jophiel, Kadkadael, Kalka'il, Kepharel, Kerubiel, Kiraman Katibin, Kokabiel, Kushiel, Lailah, Maalik, Macroprosopus, Malakbel ,Manda d-Hayyi, Marut, Mebahiah, Melek Taus, Metatron, Michael, Moroni, Mu’aqqibat, Munkar, Muriel;

Nakir, Nanael, Nathaniel, Netzach, Nidbai, Nithael, Nuriel, Ophaniel, Pahaliah, Penemue, Phanuel, Poyel,, Pravuil, Principalities, Ptahil, Puriel, Radueriel, Raguel, Ramiel, Raphael, Raziel, Rikbiel;

Sabriel, Sachiel, Sahaquiel, Sam Ziwa, Samael, Samyaza, Sandalphon, Sarathiel, Sariel, Saureil, Schemhampharae, Selaphiel Seraphiel, Shamnail, Shamsiel, Sheetil, Shilmai, Sidriel, Simat Hayyi;

Tamiel, Temeluchus, Tennin, Turail, Turiel, Uriel, Uziel, Vasiariah, Vehuel, Wormwood, Yadathan, Yarhibol, Yomiel, Yushamin, Zachariel, Zadkiel, Zagagel, Zaphkiel, Zaqiel, Zephaniel, Zephon.

And some of these names are widely used among the Hebrews and Christians also. But when someone goes into the New Testament characters that were supposed to be from the Levant we are faced with a completely different set of names that has little to do with the Hebrew language.
Let's look for example at the names of Jesus's prophets, they are:

Peter, Andrew, James, John, Philip, Bartholomew, Thomas Mathew, James, Jude, Simon and Judas Iscariot.
The name of Jesus is not used much as it is in it's form in Christian populations and I don't know why, maybe it's not meant to be a name, maybe it was considered heresy by the Catholic church to be used by peasants, but the name Christofor of Kristos or Chris or Kristaq etc are widely used and very common.

My point is that it makes sense for Christianity to have been born in the region of Spain, Portugal and France and being spread out from there judging from the perspective of people's names. Every religion has to start with the original names of people and then it self-fuels the spread and adoption of those names as it gains traction and a large growing follower base.

Here are some interesting maps of the spread of Jewish population throughout Europe in time.
Looking at these maps one would expect to see a lot of Hebrew names in accordance with the Old Testament characters in Eastern Europe like Ukraine, Poland, Baltic countries and Germany if they strictly maintained their national identity and didn't intermix with the other hosting population. Or maybe they did just that because in order to blend in which is a natural national assimilation process, and what are refereed to as common Hebrew names today are highly influenced by the local population of those countries.

It would be interesting to see the most wide spread names in Israel today and try to trace back their origin

Of course I'm not a scripture scholar and don't have all the data available to back up my thoughts admitting that I'm prone to make mistakes, because I've always followed my intuition about what's going on and try to rely less on sponsored study papers.

Some very interesting information regarding the Hebrew population for anyone wanting to delve more in because I'm going a lot off topic with the names used in Christian countries which is a very large topic in itself.
 

Attachments

  • Leitenberg Crystall-Jewish Populations Maps 2014.pdf
    2.3 MB · Views: 199
Last edited by a moderator:
The word "Jew" is not in the Bible.
It is not, and that's a separate discussion, but if to touch on it - "Jew" is a north/western label.
In the Bible the people are called:
1. Hebrews - Ivrim עברים
2. Sons of Israel
3. Judeans* - יהודים Yehudim
*The word is only presented in one chapter, where the language of Jerusalem's inhabitants is referred to as "Judean" , (Yehudit, יהודית)

The Jews refer to themselves as Yehudim or as Israel.
In eastern Slavic tongues, such as Russian/Ukrainian, Jews are called Yevrey, literally Hebrews. In Greek, Jews are Evraios. In Italian, Ebreo.
The Hebrew languange is called "Ivrit" in Russian, same as in Hebrew.
In Arabic and Turkish, Jews are called Yahudi, similar to Hebrew.
In Albanian there's another form (not sure how it's pronounced).

Plus, GL is found in many more forms than above. It can be used as "wave," with the implication of "carried away."
Yes, GL pronounced GAL means wave.
GL is also the root of גלה or Gila, Gilui (discovered, discovery).
GL is Hebrew gimmetria is also 33.

Should we then say that Gaul is GL because it was discovered, or because it's the country of the Freemasons?
The Hebrew dictionary is not a rich one, and many letter combinations can mean several things, without necessarily having a connection.

Back to "Jew." What is a "Jew?" Jew is said to be a truncation of the Judah of the Old AND New Testament - YEUDE and Ioudaios respectively. If then "Jew" is to be "Judah," which "Jew?" The Sephardim, the Ashkenazim, or the Mizrahim?
If you ask me personally I don't think they came from the same place. The religion was a practice given to them by an older Empire which stretched east to west, and they had several roles to fill: financial and trans-national. Jews would be used to communicate between states or tribes that are hostile to each other, or without relations, due to the relative neutraility of those Jews, they could be used to establish connections, trade and relay information between Jewish communities. It was an imperial sponsored cartel, which the kings used for convenience of keeping things under control, trade most of all.
As the world broke apart to nations and countries, Jews lost their original, internationally accepted status.
That's when you begin to see a great polarization: Jewish (secular) families that become extremely rich and reach for the top, and on the other hand ghettos of ultra religious Jews who 'close off', many of them resorting to foul ways of earning a living.

Therefore the question "which Jews" is not relevant. All Jewish groups have adopted the Biblical story as their own in order to gain common ground for their caste to be functional. Once the caste was cancelled, they begin to shift the story to Israel, and early Zionism begins (collecting the caste into one area, as their role in the "Galut" is obsolete.)

The Ashkenazim only recently entered into public conscious as "Jew."
don't know what you mean here?

To better explain it, Gola does not naturally mean captivity in Hebrew.
You cannot say someone is a "captive soldier", "hostage", "held captive" using this word. Not in Biblical or Modern Hebrew.
The western languages interpretate the period as "the captivity" and this looped back to Gola to mean captivity in English. Gola is not captivity in Hebrew.
Gola is Exile.
For example, when a country has a revolution and the previous government continues to function from another country, you can call it "Gola Government", because they're in exile. (not in captivity...)
 
Any etymology for that word?
There isn't much etymology regarding that because it was considered as a known fact, the same way you didn't provide any etymology for the name Yosef, you just stated that as of Jewish origin and I don't mind that. You should accept it as far as you don't speak Albanian yourself, the same way I do accept what you do explain in Hebrew. It was your question by the way to know it, not my initiative at all.
From what I know most Albanian Jews left after WW2. Those Jews who conduct business there aren't from that community. For all it's worth, they take financial advantage wherever they can, regardless who saved them or worked against them. Nobody gets a pass from their ways.
Well, I don't know them personally but I think that we might agree on it, surely ex. Ambassador Wither II knows more than us.
 
There isn't much etymology regarding that because it was considered as a known fact, the same way you didn't provide any etymology for the name Yosef, you just stated that as of Jewish origin and I don't mind that. You should accept it as far as you don't speak Albanian yourself, the same way I do accept what you do explain in Hebrew. It was your question by the way to know it, not my initiative at all.

Perhaps my phrasing was unclear, I didn't doubt the word, I genuinely asked what is the explanation behind it.

Please note I did provide the Yosef etymology several replies before:
The given etymology in the Bible makes sense. Yosef in Hebrew means "will add" , make more, continue, etc.
The story says Rachel prayed to God for another son, and that's why she named him Yosef.
 
The word "Jew" is not in the Bible.
Not quite right. "The first appearance of the word “Jew” in the Bible is in Kings II 16:6. Its connotation there is identical to that of “men of Yehuda”: “and drove the Jews from Eilat.” link
"There is neither Jew nor Greek, there is neither bond nor free, there is neither male nor female: for ye are all one in Christ Jesus." Galatians 3:28
"It is interesting to note that the New Testament records the word "Jew" or "Jews" no less than 185 times." link
"Today, we assume that the Judeans became what we know as the Jews, but the fact is that the word Jew does not appear in English until 1275." link
Hope that adds some clarity to the discussion.
 
Hope that adds some clarity to the discussion.
I'm aware of the occurrences of YEUDE and Ioudaios in the old and new testaments. The word "Jew" is an interpolation. And the modern "Jew" has no provable link to the YEUDE or Ioudaios of either OT or NT. If they claim "Jew" is a truncation, then according to the Masorah, they should be calling themselves "Yahoos" and by god maybe they should.:giggle:
The Hebrew dictionary is not a rich one, and many letter combinations can mean several things, without necessarily having a connection.
The "Hebrew" dictionary (lexicon) is only the "Hebrew" dictionary due to the Masorah. Without the strict dictation of the Masorah a word is the same whenever it appears. You're using the Masorah, and thus will be stuck with the interpretations, conclusions, and rules of unknown persons. Rules that (mind you) aren't consistent. You are repeating the text from tools created to hide the Bible, not reveal it.
 
Last edited:
The "Hebrew" dictionary (lexicon) is only the "Hebrew" dictionary due to the Masorah. Without the strict dictation of the Masorah a word is the same whenever it appears. You're using the Masorah, and thus will be stuck with the interpretations, conclusions, and rules of unknown persons. Rules that (mind you) aren't consistent. You are repeating the text from tools created to hide the Bible, not reveal it.

You're only partially correct.
A word is not always the same wherever it appears, in the base root of Hebrew, regardless of Masorah.
Just a few examples:

לך - L.KH - Can be read as
"Lekh" (=Go, walk)
"Lekha" (=to you, male)
"Lakh" (to you, female)

לחם - L.KH.M - Can be read as "Lekhem" (=Bread)
"Lakham" (=fought, male)

דבר - D.B.R - Can be read as
"Davar" (= a thing)
"Diber" (= spoke, talked, male)
"Dever" (= a plague, famine)

Those are just a few examples out of many, and are a core part of the language. If all those words were read the same, the texts would've been completely illogical and unreadable.
Unless of course you want to claim that the Masorah changed the interpretation down to every core aspect of it, converting it into a whole different language. If that's what you claim please provide proof or your analysis for it. I know very well that the language was tampered with when it comes to the meaning of words, locations and characters. To say "you don't know what you're reading because they changed everything and we'd never know" is a nice claim but you could claim this over many old languages, and there's no proof of it other than the fact that Jewish scholars are known to have tampered with the language, but we don't know to what degree.

I don't dismiss your claim, I just don't see how it's backed by anything.
 
You're only partially correct.
A word is not always the same wherever it appears, in the base root of Hebrew, regardless of Masorah.
Just a few examples:

לך - L.KH - Can be read as
"Lekh" (=Go, walk)
"Lekha" (=to you, male)
"Lakh" (to you, female)

לחם - L.KH.M - Can be read as "Lekhem" (=Bread)
"Lakham" (=fought, male)

דבר - D.B.R - Can be read as
"Davar" (= a thing)
"Diber" (= spoke, talked, male)
"Dever" (= a plague, famine)

Those are just a few examples out of many, and are a core part of the language. If all those words were read the same, the texts would've been completely illogical and unreadable.
Unless of course you want to claim that the Masorah changed the interpretation down to every core aspect of it, converting it into a whole different language. If that's what you claim please provide proof or your analysis for it. I know very well that the language was tampered with when it comes to the meaning of words, locations and characters. To say "you don't know what you're reading because they changed everything and we'd never know" is a nice claim but you could claim this over many old languages, and there's no proof of it other than the fact that Jewish scholars are known to have tampered with the language, but we don't know to what degree.

I don't dismiss your claim, I just don't see how it's backed by anything.
Cite the Strong's entries for the examples you gave. This part is important.
 
Any etymology for that word?
Borrowed from Ottoman Turkish چفوت ‎ (çıfut), from Persian جهود ‎ (johud).

The word is used by the other nationalities on the Balkan as an offensive term ... here is an example from Montenegro (from April's discussion comments)

Никац од Ровина 30/04/2022 08:29 At 08:29
Лажни Србин ,крипто ћифут Манда-Нећемо вас више гластаи па да сте нам из ока испали.Бандо превртљива издајничка .

The red bold letters read "Crypto Jew Manda" and the pronunciation of Cyrillic ћифут is just a little bit softer ("ch" i smore of a "tsy") than the Albanian Çifut and the Ottoman Turkish چفوت!
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Strong's deals with English Bible so I'm not sure what you mean here.
No. Strong's references all words in alphabetical order in "Hebrew" and/or "Greek." I'm not going to take the time to reference the words you cited, but I'd like references from Strong's. The reason for this is to demonstrate to you how arbitrary those word's definitions you've been citing are. If you look just at the "Hebrew" in context, ref. to those cited words (or any), and you understand the Masorah-dictated grammar, you'll begin to see the prolific play used among these words as well as the inconsistency of both the Masorah, which dictated "Hebrew" grammar and Lexicography, as well as that of the English (or any other language) translations and transliterations.
 
No. Strong's references all words in alphabetical order in "Hebrew" and/or "Greek." I'm not going to take the time to reference the words you cited, but I'd like references from Strong's. The reason for this is to demonstrate to you how arbitrary those word's definitions you've been citing are. If you look just at the "Hebrew" in context, ref. to those cited words (or any), and you understand the Masorah-dictated grammar, you'll begin to see the prolific play used among these words as well as the inconsistency of both the Masorah, which dictated "Hebrew" grammar and Lexicography, as well as that of the English (or any other language) translations and transliterations.

Going back to your previous post, what is it that you claim exactly? Are you aware of an alternative counter-Masoratic interpretation of words?
Are you saying that the similarly written words have the same meaning but punctuation is distorting them?

I didn't cite references as I speak Hebrew natively and didn't feel it required. I assure you my translations are correct.
Have an example here if you're in doubt.
לחם L.Kh.M
Lechem, bread
Lacham, fight/fought
 
Going back to your previous post, what is it that you claim exactly? Are you aware of an alternative counter-Masoratic interpretation of words?
Are you saying that the similarly written words have the same meaning but punctuation is distorting them?

I didn't cite references as I speak Hebrew natively and didn't feel it required. I assure you my translations are correct.
Have an example here if you're in doubt.
לחם L.Kh.M
Lechem, bread
Lacham, fight/

Going back to your previous post, what is it that you claim exactly? Are you aware of an alternative counter-Masoratic interpretation of words?
Are you saying that the similarly written words have the same meaning but punctuation is distorting them?

I didn't cite references as I speak Hebrew natively and didn't feel it required. I assure you my translations are correct.
Have an example here if you're in doubt.
לחם L.Kh.M
Lechem, bread
Lacham, fight/fought
The issue is not (necessarily) whether "bread" is appropriate for LHM. The issue is, in part, you are speaking a language that is about as close to the source language of the Bible as English is to German (both "Hebrew" and German being from a common ancestor - OBRY). The reason you need to cite Bible references, again, is because they illustrate the problem with Masoretic Hebrew, which is essentially the language you speak. H3899 LHM is used variously as: bread (237x), food (21x), meat (18x), shewbread (with H6440) (5x), loaves (5x), shewbread (with H4635) (3x), shewbread (2x), victuals (2x), eat (1x), feast (1x), fruit (1x), provision (1x). It also has homonyms, and only the gods of Biblical Lexicography get to decide the meanings of words..., unless they are made of meaningful glyphs, not letters. Here are two audios I've done on the subject:

View: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gLIDjQBPvec&list=PLdFLCbF1JJ68UG7swPRA7ZKRGzSFNWnzM&index=8


View: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8_RNW2WqSvw&list=PLdFLCbF1JJ68UG7swPRA7ZKRGzSFNWnzM&index=9


and one more that explains Septuagint issues the first hour+:

View: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JNcryU-Zy_4&list=PLdFLCbF1JJ68UG7swPRA7ZKRGzSFNWnzM&index=11
 
The issue is not (necessarily) whether "bread" is appropriate for LHM.
Didn't think it is.
The issue is, in part, you are speaking a language that is about as close to the source language of the Bible as English is to German (both "Hebrew" and German being from a common ancestor - OBRY). The reason you need to cite Bible references, again, is because they illustrate the problem with Masoretic Hebrew, which is essentially the language you speak. H3899 LHM is used variously as: bread (237x), food (21x), meat (18x), shewbread (with H6440) (5x), loaves (5x), shewbread (with H4635) (3x), shewbread (2x), victuals (2x), eat (1x), feast (1x), fruit (1x), provision (1x). It also has homonyms, and only the gods of Biblical Lexicography get to decide the meanings of words..., unless they are made of meaningful glyphs, not letters.
Here are two audios I've done on the subject

I'm sorry, but you're not saying anything new or groundbreaking. All that is Jewish culture, from its religion, storylines, and language, is a borrowing and restructuring from a previous version that was lost.
You spent the last few posts explaining that my knowledge of Hebrew is irrelevant(?) because it's hijacked. And?

Can you demonstrate anything from the "actual Hebrew", or do I need to listen to your 2 hours audios to find it?
I listened to samples from both, and you're beautifully explaining how Hebrew is essentially hijacked, but that's it so far. If you have conducted research which digs up the true meaning of words, please present it here in written form, this is a discussion forum. I won't listen to 2 hours audio to find it.

And just so we get back to the topic:
You originally had responded to my view of the French authors who used Hebrew etymology to explain placenames.
Needless to say you didn't comment about my perspective but first derailed it to how "The word Jew is not in the Bible".
Then you said I'm wrong about "GL" because it's also the letters for "wave". Why bother? The whole language is fake, you can just throw it out the window, and don't make etymologies for anything.

The latest subject here is how French had explained various countries and their names. In this subject, its irrelevant how fake Hebrew is, because for the authors in question it was real enough to explain things. So within the realm of "Masoretic Hebrew" it is relevant to discuss the meaning of words in these French works by the reconstructed Hebrew, because it was relevant for them when they wrote those French texts. In this case, their etymologies are quite incorrect and that's what I had shown.
You can't tell me Hebrew is irrelevant and at the same time dispute translations which are based on Masoretic. Unless you have some special sight to know which word is "Masoretic" or "Original".
 
Didn't think it is.



I'm sorry, but you're not saying anything new or groundbreaking. All that is Jewish culture, from its religion, storylines, and language, is a borrowing and restructuring from a previous version that was lost.
You spent the last few posts explaining that my knowledge of Hebrew is irrelevant(?) because it's hijacked. And?

Can you demonstrate anything from the "actual Hebrew", or do I need to listen to your 2 hours audios to find it?
I listened to samples from both, and you're beautifully explaining how Hebrew is essentially hijacked, but that's it so far. If you have conducted research which digs up the true meaning of words, please present it here in written form, this is a discussion forum. I won't listen to 2 hours audio to find it.

And just so we get back to the topic:
You originally had responded to my view of the French authors who used Hebrew etymology to explain placenames.
Needless to say you didn't comment about my perspective but first derailed it to how "The word Jew is not in the Bible".
Then you said I'm wrong about "GL" because it's also the letters for "wave". Why bother? The whole language is fake, you can just throw it out the window, and don't make etymologies for anything.

The latest subject here is how French had explained various countries and their names. In this subject, its irrelevant how fake Hebrew is, because for the authors in question it was real enough to explain things. So within the realm of "Masoretic Hebrew" it is relevant to discuss the meaning of words in these French works by the reconstructed Hebrew, because it was relevant for them when they wrote those French texts. In this case, their etymologies are quite incorrect and that's what I had shown.
You can't tell me Hebrew is irrelevant and at the same time dispute translations which are based on Masoretic. Unless you have some special sight to know which word is "Masoretic" or "Original".
What I DO show in various presentations in the use of the Masorah to control the language, and really far far more. Anyone who listened to those intently would understand the problems in your application of arbitrary Masoretic definitions. If you can't be bothered to educate yourself, there's no use continuing to waste my time. If you continue to use the Masorah, your opinion will be faulty on every issue pertaining to the Bible and language thereof. It's also a fallacy to demand there be a fully functional alternative model when one can show you the existing one is indeed untrustworthy. And I would submit that I've shown more solid reasons for my method than any Masorete, or supporter of the Masorah, ever has. This is an issue of fundamentals. Going back to arguing "GL" is moot if your sticking to your Masoretic guns, which I'm not sure you've even done that, as if you had provided the Strong's (which are necessary to show the error in your thought process) we could have resolved it there, but I don't think that's what you want.
 
Tips
Tips
Please respect our Posting Rules.
Back
Top