Results 1 to 5 of 5

Thread: The Language of Genesis

  1. #1

    The Language of Genesis

    These days quite a few have spread the notion of Genesis being a copy or plagiarism of Babylonian tales. If you followed the other post "Moses Was Not A Magician" you'd have noticed that the book of Genesis contains quite a few borrow words from the ancient Egyptian language rather than from newer Babylonian language. That tends to point toward Moses having relied on extremely ancient manuscripts for his information--if not solely on divine revelation. The Muslims, Gnostics and Atheists that attack the Bible have to meet with the stone wall of truth. A work by A. S. Yahuda on the topic is readily available online (about ~45MB).

    The Language of Genesis
    Moses wrote the Book of Genesis in a fully matured Hebrew language that was at that time (during the captivity and exodus) intensely under the influence of the Egyptian language -- the Hebrew language having been brought to its pitch of literary perfection by the Egyptian. The distinctly Egyptian tone in language, concept and custom pervades the entire book.
    The key to the structure of the Book of Genesis, as we learned in The Toledoth in the Book of Genesis, following the most illuminating research of P. J. Wiseman, is to be found in the repetitious phrase, "These are the generations ['Toledoth'] of..." This valuable discovery left us with no doubt that the Book of Genesis was compiled from a series of ancient documents (histories) -- recorded on writing tablets -- each one signed by one or other well-known biblical character from the Patriarchal era (e.g. Noah, Shem, Terah, Isaac, etc.), who must have owned and/or written his own set of histories.

    The main point that was to be concluded from all of this was that the Book of Genesis is a most ancient document, the bulk of its material having been written before the time of Moses.

    Moses is traditionally regarded as being the editor or compiler of the Book of Genesis. I am going to produce some compelling evidence to show that this tradition is a reliable one. To this end, I expect to gain assistance from linguistics; specifically from the ancient Egyptian language. One Professor A. S. Yahuda made the enormously important discovery that Egyptian exerted a profound influence upon the language of Genesis. [1]

    Here I shall be pre-supposing the following data pertaining to the historical Moses:

    1). That Moses lived in Egypt during the Middle Kingdom; the time of those Asiatics of Stratum G/1 at Tell el-Daba (ancient Avaris), whom have been identified as the Israelites;

    2). That Moses was, culturally speaking, "Egyptianized". For, since the aforementioned Asiatics, who were slaves, show every indication of having been "Egyptianized", how much more should we expect "Egyptianization" in the case of Moses, whom, we are told, had been brought up since childhood in the household of pharaoh (cf. Exodus 2:8, 10)! In fact, when Moses fled Egypt and arrived in Midian, he was straightaway identified there as being "an Egyptian" (Exodus 2:19).

    3). Moses had been highly educated in all the culture of Egypt (Acts 7:22). Thus we would expect that he, in his speech and writing -- even after the Exodus -- would continue to reflect that sophisticated Egyptian influence in regard to idiom, polished phraseology, metaphors, etc.

    Now, what we are going to discover in this article is that there does in fact exist a profound Egyptian influence of this latter kind throughout the language of Genesis. More: continued.
    One key point I've been aiming to get through some skulls is: the ruler that denies a higher authority is likely doing so because he is aiming to obliterate any restrictions on what he can or cannot do... to YOU. If he denies any God or higher power while putting himself up as the only "god", watch it! Self-appointed God-men might hate the limitations placed on them and so they rebel. If they can get you to go along with your own demise, do you think they'd hinder you in doing so?

    Now the geniuses love to claim this to be about "dogma" or someone like me to be "dogmatic" when its really plain on its face its about truth vs lying. If they are lying and their lies are obvious the question is: what are they trying to hide? Even if the works or books in question were ultimately fiction if one clique can't even tell the truth or get its story straight about the work and are outright lying--it is not a matter of dogma unless you think preference to honesty to be a relic of dogmatic thinking.

    I don't aim to promote any latent 'genotypic' or 'biological views' about 'race' or such predispositions that may be found in the linked article because a lot of problems seem to have arisen out of the attempt of neo-Germans the like to write themselves into history as a kind of "master race" and thusly their writings have tended to skew and to skewer things with that kind of perspective of researching and writing to assert a cultural bendt. The key is the language and Yahuda's works shows the obvious that is even shown in Genesis the ancient-ness of the original texts.

    Related:
    Moses Was Not A Magician
    Last edited by allodial; 07-29-15 at 04:18 PM.
    All rights reserved. Without prejudice. No liability assumed. No value assured.

    "The object in life is not to be on the side of the majority, but to escape finding oneself in the ranks of the insane." -- Marcus Aurelius
    "It is the glory of God to conceal a thing: but the honour of kings is to search out a matter." Proverbs 25:2
    Prove all things; hold fast that which is good. Thess. 5:21.

  2. #2
    Quote Originally Posted by allodial View Post
    These days quite a few have spread the notion of Genesis being a copy or plagiarism of Babylonian tales. If you followed the other post "Moses Was Not A Magician" you'd have noticed that the book of Genesis contains quite a few borrow words from the ancient Egyptian language rather than from newer Babylonian language. That tends to point toward Moses having relied on extremely ancient manuscripts for his information--if not solely on divine revelation. The Muslims, Gnostics and Atheists that attack the Bible have to meet with the stone wall of truth. A work by A. S. Yahuda on the topic is readily available online (about ~45MB).



    One key point I've been aiming to get through some skulls is: the ruler that denies a higher authority is likely doing so because he is aiming to obliterate any restrictions on what he can or cannot do... to YOU. If he denies any God or higher power while putting himself up as the only "god", watch it! Self-appointed God-men might hate the limitations placed on them and so they rebel. If they can get you to go along with your own demise, do you think they'd hinder you in doing so?

    Now the geniuses love to claim this to be about "dogma" or someone like me to be "dogmatic" when its really plain on its face its about truth vs lying. If they are lying and their lies are obvious the question is: what are they trying to hide? Even if the works or books in question were ultimately fiction if one clique can't even tell the truth or get its story straight about the work and are outright lying--it is not a matter of dogma unless you think preference to honesty to be a relic of dogmatic thinking.

    I don't aim to promote any latent 'genotypic' or 'biological views' about 'race' or such predispositions that may be found in the linked article because a lot of problems seem to have arisen out of the attempt of neo-Germans the like to write themselves into history as a kind of "master race" and thusly their writings have tended to skew and to skewer things with that kind of perspective of researching and writing to assert a cultural bendt. The key is the language and Yahuda's works shows the obvious that is even shown in Genesis the ancient-ness of the original texts.

    Related:
    Moses Was Not A Magician
    hi alldial,

    have you seen the mechanical translation?

    http://www.ancient-hebrew.org/bookstore/e-books/mtg.pdf

    what do you make of it?

    thanks

  3. #3
    Thanks for that link. The Mechanical Translation is quite interesting. However, I fortunately gained to ability to some extent read ancient Hebrew and ancient Greek. The Mechanical Translation reminds me of when I would at times read texts from their Paleo-style symbolic putting bias out of mind.

    On that note, there is also Green's literal translation (aka LITV) (might be JW slanted afaik). There is also the Beth HaShem paleo-hebrew Torah: http://www.bethashem.org/torah_docs/torah.html.

    Consider the first word in Genesis: the first two letters are reminiscent of son (house-arm or arm of the house) the middle is somewhat reminiscent of Joshua ... you can see the word bar (as in son)..almost like son/bar..in Hebrew middle three letters backwards are reminiscent of Jesus --though I'm not suggesting it to be more than a passing 'fancy'. Apparently, I'm not the only one whose noticed this. However, at Exodus 3:14 in Hebrew right in the middle of the key part of the reply to Moses. What's hiding in there?



    It has been suggested that the Essense were named in the sense of "followers of Yahshua" (meaning also followers of Jesus/Joshua). Look at the Hebrew at Exodus 3:14.

    Name:  Exodus_3_14.png
Views: 320
Size:  78.5 KB

    Not suggesting the KVJ or other translations to be wrong. However, when one knows the Hebrew even just the basic symbology, one can see for oneself what is or isn't there. Also, consider that its a moment of salvation for the Hebrews. Consider the relationship between the name Moses and the word for 'salvation' or 'savior' and look at the response to Moses and the vowel points on the SH.
    Last edited by allodial; 07-29-15 at 06:25 PM.
    All rights reserved. Without prejudice. No liability assumed. No value assured.

    "The object in life is not to be on the side of the majority, but to escape finding oneself in the ranks of the insane." -- Marcus Aurelius
    "It is the glory of God to conceal a thing: but the honour of kings is to search out a matter." Proverbs 25:2
    Prove all things; hold fast that which is good. Thess. 5:21.

  4. #4
    Something else to consider...

    The charge that biblical scripture is just a rehash of early ancient ideas and text fails to pass the sniff test if one delves into study of the polemic nature of Genesis against Babylonian/pagan culture and beliefs.

    http://www.michaelsheiser.com/TheNak...selGen1ANE.pdf

    https://bible.org/article/genesis-1-...ths#P107_27442

    There are vast differences between the two belief sets and the text of Genesis was God's way of setting the record straight in the face of the rebellious and evil culture which dominated the age. He chose to have His "set-apart" Nation be the well-spring of truth and the vehicle to reclaim the scattered and lost nations of the world.

    No one with a sense of truth and honesty could equate the Genesis account with the Babylonian culture after intense study of the obvious differences in the ideas of creation and origins between the two.

  5. #5
    Moses hit the a second rock Adams ego runs in the family Moe told the crew God was angry the murmuring were killed Moe new whose fault this was pleaded for God to stop Moses put a brass serpent on a pole have the dying be healed look upon it. The cross of Christ no dogma put up here john 3,14,16>Man ox lion eagle the camps surrounding the levities looks like another cross. Sabbath was happening in Egypt before the The Torah law established it in exodus .old test revealed in new testament. new test concealed in the old test .

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •