Hebrew origins and what the word faith originally means

[letirrain]

Hello, wrote and pasted some of this very fast. but, it is ground breaking knoweledge about the origins of the hebrew in the bible..

Sorry about the mess in the alphabet below, but its good to use when you are filled witht the holy spirit to guide you. I know some of the meanings are contradictiary, its because.. when they found the dead sea scrolls and so on.. there was no alphabet that explained the meaning.. so people disagree you know…


:1.  Aleph(first letter of hebrew alphabet)=ox- Bertie Brits: Leader, strength, Sacrifice (Frank T. Seekings: strength, leader, first)
:2.  Beth=house- Dwelling place, household, acceptance (in, into, family)
:3. Gimel=camel- Uplift, carry, exultation, ascend (pride, animal)
:4. Dalet=door- Way, passage, entrance/exit access (pathway, to enter)
:5. Hey=man with two hands stretched up- revelation, to reveal, grace (the, to reveal)
:6. VAV=nail- Join together, nailed (and, to add, to secure)
:7. Zayin=weapon- Sword, cut off, word, tounge (cut, to cut off)
:8. Chet=fence- Separate, private, fence, protect (private, to separate)
:9. Tet=snake- Twist, surround, snake (to surround)
:10. Yood=hand- Extended, giving/receiving, power, ruling (work, a deed, to make)
:11. Kaf=palm of hand- Cover, protect, work, feed, power (to cover, to open, allow)
:12. Lamed=cattle goad-Teaching, correct, direct, authority (control, authority, tounge)
:13. Mem=water- Reflection, Spirit, fullness of life (liquid, massive, chaos)
:14. Noun=fish(seed darting trough the water)- activity, life, multi directional, man (activity, life)
:15. Samech=prop- support, fortress, uphold, spine (support, twist, slowly, turn) Other inter: =Thorn- Grab, Hate, Protect
:16. Ayin=eye- understand, to know, experience, to see (to see, know, experience)
:17. Pey=mouth- speak, eat, drink, a word, open (to speak, word, open)
:18. Tsdik=fish hook (host insect) – harvest, hooked, change (Metamorphosis)) (catch, desire, need)
:19. Koof=back of head(priest cast)- Kingdom, ruler, behind, last (behind, the last, the least) Other interp:=Sun on the Horizon- Condense, Circle, Time
:20. Resh=Head of man- To think, meditate, the head, the boss (a person, the head, the highest)
:21. Sheen=Teeth- Gods Glory, shining, radiance, pressure (to consume, to destroy)
:22. Tuv=Cross- Cross, sealing of a covenant (to seal, to covenant)
:23. Rope- Rope of twisted fibers Crooked, dark, goat, silent

The interpretation of the ancient hebrew letters above are based on Frank T. Seekings book "Hebrew Word Pictures" and videos by Bertie Brits on Youtube and Godtube.

Hebrew origins and what the word faith originally means:
To actually read the old hebrew testament in its original form and interprent the meaning of the hebrew word pictures, download E-sword with the user-addon: "Ancient hebrew lexicon". Also you need blueletterbible.org with strongs to know the strong number of the word which you can find in the ancient hebrew lexicon. There is disagreement about what the meaning hebrew word pictures are.

Okay an example what the word faith actually means.. ¨
Two words of faith are used in new testamen:
[FONT=&quot]Strong's G4102 - pistis [/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]πίστις[/FONT]

[FONT=&quot]Transliteration[/FONT]​

[FONT=&quot]pistis[/FONT]​

[FONT=&quot]Pronunciation[/FONT]​

[FONT=&quot]pē'-stēs[/FONT]​

Transliteration

[FONT=&quot]Strong's G4100 - pisteuō [/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]πιστεύω[/FONT]

[FONT=&quot]Transliteration[/FONT]​

[FONT=&quot]pisteuō[/FONT]​

[FONT=&quot]Pronunciation[/FONT]​

[FONT=&quot]pē-styü'-ō [/FONT][FONT=&quot](Key)[/FONT]​

pē-styü'-ō (Key)

I’m pleased to inform you that there are two instances where this word refers to the word faith in old testament, in other words the Hebrew.. They both refer to the same rooth word aman, and emuwnah (that is an extension from the word aman) Then we can conclude: They both mean the same, and we have two sources from TWO different languages..How cool… And I’m also very pleased that my research conclude that both languages means the same, but before I reveal the answer, here is the old testament word for faith:


[FONT=&quot]Strong's H539 - 'aman [/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]אָמַן[/FONT]

[FONT=&quot]Transliteration[/FONT]​

[FONT=&quot]'aman [/FONT]​

[FONT=&quot]Pronunciation[/FONT]​

[FONT=&quot]ä·man'[/FONT]​

[FONT=&quot]Strong's H530 - 'emuwnah [/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]אֱמוּנָה[/FONT]

[FONT=&quot]Transliteration[/FONT]​

[FONT=&quot]'emuwnah [/FONT]​

[FONT=&quot]Pronunciation[/FONT]​

[FONT=&quot]em·ü·nä' [/FONT][FONT=&quot](Key)[/FONT]​

Proof of what faith means from the new testament:

Example 1:

Jesus told Peter he did not have enough faith when he tried to walk on the water..
In south korea people tried the same thing to walk on the water, but they sunk and died.. When their pastor asked God why: God said that Jesus TOLD PETER to walk on the water.. In other words Jesus spoke first…
---

Example 2:
Jesus rebuke his disciples for having to little faith in the storm when they got afraid.. Remember that Jesus told them to go to the other side… aha.. Same as example one
--

Example 3:
Jesus commends the lame man who came down from the hole in the roof.. But why didn’t these guys wait for when Jesus came out of the house after the meeting.. Because Holy spirit gave them the idea to make the whole in the roof

--

Example 4:
Jesus commend the centaurian for his great faith “never has I seen such faith In Israel” … The centaurian said: I have soldiers under me which I command and I am commanded by the leader above me..
He got the idea, to represent the commandment of the leader in a way which reflects the leader to the highest possible degree: to have faith God must have spoke to you first.. Yes I’m talking about hearing Gods voice throw the holy spirit.. The way Bethel church redding, IHOP, Morning star and so many other ministries focuses on today as central thing….

Final example from the new testament:
Rom 10:17 So then faith [cometh] by hearing, and hearing by the word of God.

Yes faith comes by hearing GOD SPEAK TO YOU THE WAY HE WANTS TO SPEAK! Faith doesn’t come by hearing your pastor preaching, if we use the original meaning of faith


Alrighty, so then the Hebrew…We will use the alphabet above and see if we can find out of this:

Emuwnah:
[FONT=&quot]Enfma%[/FONT][FONT=&quot] ([/FONT][FONT=&quot]Enfma%[/FONT][FONT=&quot]A-MW-NH[/FONT][FONT=&quot]) - Firmness: [freq. 49] |kjv: faithfulness, truth, faithfully, office, faithful, faith, stability, steady, truly| {str: 530}[/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]a[/FONT]Aleph-Ox- Leader, strength, (also: sacrificial ox) Sacrifice (strength, leader, first)
[FONT=&quot]m[/FONT]Mem=water-Reflection, Spirit, fullness of life (liquid, massive, chaos)
[FONT=&quot]f[/FONT]VAV=nail- Join together, nailed (and, to add, to secure)
[FONT=&quot]n[/FONT]Noun=Fish(darting trough the water)-activity, life, multi directional, man (activity, life)
[FONT=&quot]e[/FONT] Hey=window revelation, to reveal, Grace (Frank: the, to reveal)

Conclusion from the above:
Ok, Aleph, Ox stands for God… Why, cause all gods name, atleast that I know of starts with this letter.. And who is our leader,, God offcourse..
Conclusion: Faith HAS to start with God speaking/leading us

Water is spirit nailed to life/activity/action.. that’s an easy one… faith without works are dead.. we know that from new testament.. so hearing gods voice without acting on it is not faith…
And then we have revelation…
Spirit of revelation.. Isaiah 11:1

Ok there you have it..
A little bonus, what does God’s name mean on Hebrew: Yahweh and Elohim:
Yehovah 3068: Hand, :5. Hey=man with two hands stretched up- revelation, to reveal, grace (the, to reveal)
, nail, :5. Hey=man with two hands stretched up- revelation, to reveal, grace (the, to reveal)
: Th

First letter is hand, so basicly ruling or something, and then there is two letters for revelation… Revelation is a big thing in this name..

Okay.. what about elohim:
God/Elohim: Ox,Cattle Goad,Window,Hand,Water:

Ox and cattle goad and revelation and hand and spirit.. Okay allot about ruling us here, ruling throw revelation obviously, and throw our spirit.. Fascinating



Please spread this information around…
What can we conclude from all of this.. Yes: The just shall live from faith to faith.. and faith means acting on Gods leadership.. And faith comes by hearing.. in other words to get more faith, we need to hear Gods voice more often, we need to get more revelation..
And offcourse to get more revelation we need to get more filled up by the holy spirit, and the also practice a little.. faith without works is dead right
So, conclusion, go to the extreme in spending time in the holy spirits presence.. like 12 hours a day or something.. go to church less, read the bible less, work less, waste ur time less on spare time activities, spend more time with the holy spirit.. And then practice acting on what the holy spirit tells you.. Practice by asking him for road directon, and see if he gets you there.. Practice with prophetic evangelism.. And so on

Cheers.. that’s all.. We must stay obedient to the bible: FOR THE JUST SHALL LIVE BY FAITH!!!!

 

[yonah_mishael]

This is not how you learn Hebrew. This tells you nothing about what the word means. Meaning is determined by context, not by mystical letter combinations. This is nothing but a waste of time and a diversion.

 

[yedida]

From experience I can tell you what he is teaching is from the Word of Faith camp, he's just thrown in some Hebrew words (and/or Hebrew Roots type teachings which are incomplete to say the least).
To me messing around with the language (which is rotten and attempts to change what is actually written) is bad enough but the WoF part is dangerous and unscriptural. WoF is just wrong. As you read, what it comes down to is that if you're not able to walk on the water it's because you have not "heard" God or the Spirit tell you to do so, if you have not "heard" from God then you're not in God's will, or maybe not even His, etc. See where all that is leading to? Dangerous!

 

[yonah_mishael]

Either way, "Enfma% (Enfma%A-MW-NH) - Firmness: [freq. 49] |kjv: faithfulness, truth, faithfully, office, faithful, faith, stability, steady, truly| {str: 530}" means nothing to me. This "Enfma%" is not a Hebrew word. He means to have posted אֱמוּנָה but isn't aware that the legacy font that whatever program or website he was using doesn't display here. He should have fixed his post to actually have the Hebrew word, but he certainly didn't. He posted gibberish for us and expects everyone else to sort it out. That's just irritating. It's not Hebrew.

 

[yedida]

Either way, "Enfma% (Enfma%A-MW-NH) - Firmness: [freq. 49] |kjv: faithfulness, truth, faithfully, office, faithful, faith, stability, steady, truly| {str: 530}" means nothing to me. This "Enfma%" is not a Hebrew word. He means to have posted אֱמוּנָה but isn't aware that the legacy font that whatever program or website he was using doesn't display here. He should have fixed his post to actually have the Hebrew word, but he certainly didn't. He posted gibberish for us and expects everyone else to sort it out. That's just irritating. It's not Hebrew.

I'm such a dunce! I saw that percent sign but didn't really think much about it, didn't read all of the smaller lighter print (my eyes got drawn to the bolded print), so I just thought it was a typo!!

 

[childofdust]

The OP is complete nonsense. I'm starting to wonder why there are so many people making claims about Hebrew who know absolutely nothing about what they're talking about.

Note: just because you have Strong's or some other tool doesn't mean you have any idea how to use it. Having a stethoscope doesn't make you able to diagnose a medical condition. Neither does Strong's or some other resource tell you anything about Hebrew.

The OP does bring up an interesting thought, though... I wonder what word(s) a Hebrew manuscript of Matthew like DuTillet used in place of the Greek word for “faith”... Some random samples...

Matt 6:30: ‫אמנה‬ (instead of oligopistoi)
Matt 8:10: ‫אמונה‬ (instead of pistis)
Matt 9:2: ‫אמונתם‬ (instead of pistis)
Matt 21:21: אמונה (instead of pistis)

So אמונה (reliability/firmness/trustworthiness/faithfulness) is the constant Hebraic substitute in this text for the Greek word “faith.” It is used, for instance, to describe the state of Moshe's hands when they were constantly held up (instead of falling down) by Aaron and Hur (Exod 17:12). In II Kings 22:7, it is used to describe the builders chosen for the repairing of YHWH's temple. They are said to be “trustworthy/faithful” so no accounting of the money given to them is needed. Etc.

So using the Hebrew, our samples would say something like...

Matt 6:30 – Oh, you of little trustworthiness
Matt 8:10 – Truly I tell you, with no one in Israel have I found such faithfulness
Matt 9:2 – And when Jesus saw their firmness
Matt 21:21 – Truly, I say to you, if you are steadfast

So faith in the Hebraic sense is something you do without wavering... It is the manifestation of a commitment, of a resolute mind, of the one who has integrity instead of compromise. Torah-observance would be one aspect of that. Those who had faith would be those who would obey YHWH's commands instead of turning away. The righteous will live by their faith (Hab 2:4) – in other words, the righteous person will live through their faithfulness to God... like the children of Israel who would lose their life when Moshe' hands would grow weary and fall, but would maintain their lives when Moshe' hands were firm. Notice there... Moshe's faith didn't depend entirely on him - in fact, his faith was strengthened by others.

 

[Yahu]

Hello, wrote and pasted some of this very fast. but, it is ground breaking knoweledge about the origins of the hebrew in the bible..

Sorry about the mess in the alphabet below, but its good to use when you are filled witht the holy spirit to guide you. I know some of the meanings are contradictiary, its because.. when they found the dead sea scrolls and so on.. there was no alphabet that explained the meaning.. so people disagree you know…

I am familiar with the paleo-hebrew pictograph meanings. Dr Frank Seekins is at least missing a several of the letter alternate definitions.

Mem - waters can also be a reference to people. This is referenced all over the scriptures. David talks about his enemies being a 'flood' and waves. In Revelation the harlot is over Many Waters that the angel declares are 'peoples, tribes, nations and tongues'. The association between 'waters' and 'people' is common. We are waters. We are made mostly of water. Birth begins with the 'breaking of the water'. We are conceived in an exchange of 'waters'. The 'waters above' are the angelic beings while the 'waters below' are the earthly beings. The voice of 'many waters' is a great multitude.

An example is the word MLK, (melek - king or molech 'shameful king'). Water, authority, open hand becomes the 'hand of authority over the waters/people' is a king. The biblical example is Moses with his hand on the staff and his hand over the waters that parts the Red Sea and leads the people to safety. A true king is a shepherd, a leader, not a dictator.

Ayin - eye, fountain, source of waters, even vaginal opening. The different forms of Ayin could have been drawn either vertically or horizontally.

A good example of this alternate meaning is the word Da'at which means 'knowledge'. Dalet-ayin-tav or 'doorway, eye, cross/covenant', is to use the 'doorway of the eye to read scripture' is to gain 'knowledge'. It is NOT general knowledge but 'knowledge of covenant'. When it is used in the form of 'carnal knowledge' it is 'doorway, vagina, covenant' or to 'use the doorway of the vagina in the covenant of marriage'. This is how the same word can have alternate meanings by using the alternate letter meanings. It has to be taken from the context in the modern Hebrew but in the paleo-hebrew they could draw the letters differently for the alternate meanings. Sometimes Da'at is used for 'carnal knowlege' and sometimes 'yada' is used.

Dr Seekins tends to leave out any of the sexual references probably out of some sense of puritanism or he just plain doesn't know them.

Now for reference, I am not an expert in Hebrew. I only had one semester in bible college but by learning the paleo-hebrew pictographs it helped to be able to see and remember the vocabulary meanings.

I learned enough Hebrew to be able to use an interlinear and to understand how things got translated the way they did. It also helped to find errors within the vowel pointing.

A good example of a place that most translations have an error is Isa 57:9. They translate MLK as 'king' when the passage is talking about the paganism of Baalim worship in the grove above and the killing of the children in the valley below. It is a reference to Molech worship in the valley of Himmom. If the individuals didn't understand the context, they vowel pointed MLK as melek instead of Molech. Translators used the wrong vowel pointed word in most translations. The Amplified says 'king [or Molech]' to show it is debated.

 

[Yahu]

From experience I can tell you what he is teaching is from the Word of Faith camp, he's just thrown in some Hebrew words (and/or Hebrew Roots type teachings which are incomplete to say the least).
To me messing around with the language (which is rotten and attempts to change what is actually written) is bad enough but the WoF part is dangerous and unscriptural. WoF is just wrong. As you read, what it comes down to is that if you're not able to walk on the water it's because you have not "heard" God or the Spirit tell you to do so, if you have not "heard" from God then you're not in God's will, or maybe not even His, etc. See where all that is leading to? Dangerous!

While I agree with you about 'word of faith' doctrine, there is nothing wrong with going back to the paleo-hebrew. It is how the words derived their meanings. I even attended a bible college and later found out it was 'word of Faith' based. Needless to say, I only stayed the 1st year before going to a different bible college.

In English, in the word 'cat' the c, a, and t have no meaning. Only when combined together as sounds does the word have meaning. This is not true of Hebrew. Each letter was originally draw like hieroglyphics. Each letter was a picture. It was in how those letter/pictures were combined that the word derived its meaning. It was at the Babylonian captivity that the current form of Hebrew letters were developed. Moses wrote in the paleo-hebrew form which is similar to Phoenician.

Psalms 119 has a section for each Hebrew letter.

The word pictures explain many things. For example the word for 'bless' is the picture of 'fire on the head' as in the presence of the Holy Spirit. When scripture states to bless your enemy and bring down 'coals of fire on their head' it isn't a bad thing. It is a reference to bringing the Holy Spirit into their life so they can change. It is also a confirmation that the word pictures hold value by directly representing a word picture.

 

[Romans8282012]

I just wanted to thank you for what u wrote. I have been studying what faith means, and yours was one of the best explanations I have read and it was a blessing and revelation to me. God bless

 

[yedida]

While I agree with you about 'word of faith' doctrine, there is nothing wrong with going back to the paleo-hebrew. It is how the words derived their meanings. I even attended a bible college and later found out it was 'word of Faith' based. Needless to say, I only stayed the 1st year before going to a different bible college.

In English, in the word 'cat' the c, a, and t have no meaning. Only when combined together as sounds does the word have meaning. This is not true of Hebrew. Each letter was originally draw like hieroglyphics. Each letter was a picture. It was in how those letter/pictures were combined that the word derived its meaning. It was at the Babylonian captivity that the current form of Hebrew letters were developed. Moses wrote in the paleo-hebrew form which is similar to Phoenician.

Psalms 119 has a section for each Hebrew letter.

The word pictures explain many things. For example the word for 'bless' is the picture of 'fire on the head' as in the presence of the Holy Spirit. When scripture states to bless your enemy and bring down 'coals of fire on their head' it isn't a bad thing. It is a reference to bringing the Holy Spirit into their life so they can change. It is also a confirmation that the word pictures hold value by directly representing a word picture.

The gist of what you say is true, but the fact is that many teachers (sadly, some even Messianic) pass on information about the "readings" of words that are not at all correct. When you hear such a teaching, don't just accept it - research it on your own before you pass it on as valid. I couldn't tell you how many such word pictures I've heard over the years only to find after studying them out, that it was just some fantastic imagination at work. Be diligent.

 

[benelchi]

The gist of what you say is true, but the fact is that many teachers (sadly, some even Messianic) pass on information about the "readings" of words that are not at all correct. When you hear such a teaching, don't just accept it - research it on your own before you pass it on as valid. I couldn't tell you how many such word pictures I've heard over the years only to find after studying them out, that it was just some fantastic imagination at work. Be diligent.

Even saying that the "gist" of this is true is giving this far too much credit. There is only the slightest hint of a truth behind a massive cloud of misinformation. Yes, it is true that the paleo-Hebraic (Phoenician) alphabet had an origin in pictographs. However, those pictographs are poorly understood today and there are no existent Hebrew texts that are constructed by pictures.

Additionally, Hebrew has a very strong grammatical pattern where letters are added to roots to add meaning. The same letter can have very different meanings depending on where the letter is added to the root. For example, the letter ו when added to שמר simply changes it to the present participle i.e. שומר (guarding), but when added to the end of ספר (book) it becomes ספרו (his book). In neither case did the picture play any part in the interpretation of the text. Understanding a text in Hebrew based on a Paleo-Hebraic pictograph would be an extremely rare occurrence and would never apply across any written text. The claims made by those presenting these ideas are pure fiction!

 

[benelchi]

I learned enough Hebrew to be able to use an interlinear and to understand how things got translated the way they did. It also helped to find errors within the vowel pointing.

Many fluent Hebrew speakers could not find errors in vowel pointings. Until one understands the grammar of Hebrew well enough to insert the pointings into an unpointed text, they cannot identify errors in an already pointed text. Sometimes their are multiple valid options for a pointing in a given text and when the pointing is grammatically correct there is no grammatical error but their is a possibility of a misinterpretation of the text when pointings are inserted into an upointed text.

A good example of a place that most translations have an error is Isa 57:9. They translate MLK as 'king' when the passage is talking about the paganism of Baalim worship in the grove above and the killing of the children in the valley below. It is a reference to Molech worship in the valley of Himmom. If the individuals didn't understand the context, they vowel pointed MLK as melek instead of Molech. Translators used the wrong vowel pointed word in most translations. The Amplified says 'king [or Molech]' to show it is debated.

The text of Isa. 57:9 reads, as pointed by the Masorites, "to the king;" the reason that most translations read "to Molek" is because it is believed that the pointings placed in this text by the Masorites are incorrect. Incorrect pointings are often identified by looking at the same verse in another ancient translation like the Syriac, Aramaic Targums, LXX, etc... to see how the passage was understood in ancient times as well as looking at context. In the case of this verse, neither argument is exceptionally strong and both options are valid translations.

 

[benelchi]

The OP is complete nonsense. I'm starting to wonder why there are so many people making claims about Hebrew who know absolutely nothing about what they're talking about.

Note: just because you have Strong's or some other tool doesn't mean you have any idea how to use it. Having a stethoscope doesn't make you able to diagnose a medical condition. Neither does Strong's or some other resource tell you anything about Hebrew.

I completely agree! The Strong’s concordance is a great tool, but one that is too often abused. The biblical lexicon’s numbering systems allow one to identify lexical forms (i.e. roots) of Hebrew and Greek words that are used in the source that is represented in a text of a translation. Originally, this was intended to be used by biblical language students to aid in recognizing roots that might be difficult to recognize in the form found in a particular text. For example the infinitive form of נתן looks like לתת when it is found in the text of the bible i.e. both the first letter (very useful for finding words in a lexicon), and the last letter are dropped when the infinitive is formed. For the Hebrew student who has not memorized this infinitive form, finding this word in a lexicon is nearly impossible, and a Strong’s makes it possible for a student to find the lexical form of the word that he otherwise might not have been able to find.

Unfortunately, sometimes people have tried to use Strong’s to translate the English text back to Greek or Hebrew and then “correct” their English translation and this is something this tool was NEVER designed to do and using the tool for this purpose is an endeavor that can lead to disastrous conclusions. Something that few ever realize is that the lexical form (found in a Strong’s lexicon) is seldom the form that is found in the text itself, and the form in used in the text and the context in which it is used is absolutely necessary to understand before the meaning of a word itself can be understood. Too often people misuse a Strong’s concordance by simply looking through the list of definitions and then picking the one that “they like best”; often picking a definition is not even possible when the context and grammar are considered. In Hebrew, for example, each root (lexical form) can be conjugated in seven different constructions i.e. passive, active, intensive, intensive/passive, causative, causative/passive, and reflexive. Looking at the root אכל these constructions would correspond to eat, be eaten, devour, be devoured, feed, be fed, digest. Understanding the particular construction used is required before one decides which meaning is intended. Full lexicons, like BDB, will separate the meanings by the corresponding construction but there is not enough room in Strong’s to provide this information. Looking at the Strong’s entry below, one must realize that definitions given are examples from several different Hebrew constructions i.e. eat is the qal form אכל, devour is the piel form מאכל, and feed is the hiphal form מאכיל; simply choosing a definition without regard to the form used in the text is prone to error (sometimes serious error).

Strong’s

398 אכל a primitive root; to eat (literally or figuratively):-- eat, burn up, consume, devour(-er, up), dine, eat(-er, up), feed (with), food.


To demonstrate how important these constructions might be in understanding a text, both of the following sentences below come from the exact same roots i.e. Strong’s 935 (to come), 1004 (house), 398 (eat).
תבוא לביתי לאכול
תבוא לביתי להאכל

One says, “You will come to my house to eat.” And the other says, “you will come to my house to be eaten.” A Strong's will not help one determine which form of Strong's entry 398 was used.

If you were given this invitation, don’t you think it would be important to know which form of the verb אכל was used?

 

[Yahu]

Many fluent Hebrew speakers could not find errors in vowel pointings. Until one understands the grammar of Hebrew well enough to insert the pointings into an unpointed text, they cannot identify errors in an already pointed text. Sometimes their are multiple valid options for a pointing in a given text and when the pointing is grammatically correct there is no grammatical error but their is a possibility of a misinterpretation of the text when pointings are inserted into an upointed text.

The text of Isa. 57:9 reads, as pointed by the Masorites, "to the king;" the reason that most translations read "to Molek" is because it is believed that the pointings placed in this text by the Masorites are incorrect. Incorrect pointings are often identified by looking at the same verse in another ancient translation like the Syriac, Aramaic Targums, LXX, etc... to see how the passage was understood in ancient times as well as looking at context. In the case of this verse, neither argument is exceptionally strong and both options are valid translations.

Most translation don't say Molech, they say 'king'. Only my Amplified has [or Molech]. I guess they just translated the vowel pointed Hebrew.

Actually if you understand the context, Molech is the correct form IMO. The verse is talking about ritual witchcraft conducted via sacrifices and worship to Molech. Witchcraft is a major part of the Baalim worship paganism. Asherah and Ashtoreth are the two main principalities behind goddess based witchcraft.

I knew a high priestess of Ashtoreth over 25 years ago. That conflict is why I started researching the ancient paganism and why I learned Hebrew to identify problems like why most translations say 'king' in this passage. I needed to know how the translators could get a passage wrong and know when I can toss the standard translation.

For example, the English translations do a bad job on Job. It hides the fact that Job's friends are actually pagans that follow different gods. For example, Eliphaz is a sun god worshiper.

 

[benelchi]

Most translation don't say Molech, they say 'king'. Only my Amplified has [or Molech]. I guess they just translated the vowel pointed Hebrew.

I am sorry, you are mistaken. Here are some additional and very popular versions that do use Molech:

NIV2011 Isaiah 57:9 You went to Molek with olive oil and increased your perfumes. You sent your ambassadors far away; you descended to the very realm of the dead!

NIV Isaiah 57:9 You went to Molech with olive oil and increased your perfumes. You sent your ambassadors far away; you descended to the grave itself!

NRSV Isaiah 57:9 You journeyed to Molech with oil, and multiplied your perfumes; you sent your envoys far away, and sent down even to Sheol.

QBE Isaiah 57:9 You went to Molech with olive oil and increased your perfumes; you sent your ambassadors far away, you sent them down to Sheol itself!

TNIV Isaiah 57:9 You went to Molek with olive oil and increased your perfumes. You sent your ambassadors far away; you descended to the very realm of the dead!

Actually if you understand the context, Molech is the correct form IMO. The verse is talking about ritual witchcraft conducted via sacrifices and worship to Molech. Witchcraft is a major part of the Baalim worship paganism. Asherah and Ashtoreth are the two main principalities behind goddess based witchcraft.

I knew a high priestess of Ashtoreth over 25 years ago. That conflict is why I started researching the ancient paganism and why I learned Hebrew to identify problems like why most translations say 'king' in this passage. I needed to know how the translators could get a passage wrong and know when I can toss the standard translation.

For example, the English translations do a bad job on Job. It hides the fact that Job's friends are actually pagans that follow different gods. For example, Eliphaz is a sun god worshiper.

The point is that you are clearly making your decision about what the text says based on your "gut feelings" alone and then passing that decision off as being based on a better understanding of the Hebrew text when it clearly is not. The text clearly says, as pointed by the Masorites, "to the King" and while their are valid arguments for questioning the pointings added by the Masorites, there is no valid argument for questioning the accuracy of the translations that have chosen to follow the Masorite pointings.


As for direct textual evidence in the ANE, the LXX does not contain this phrase at all and so provides no help. However, the Aramaic Targums do speak of the "government/מלכות" (formed from the same root as king) and so provides strong evidence for an ancient understand of "king" rather than "Molech." And, as mentioned before, the Hebrew pointings of the Masorites clearly indicate "king" rather than "Molech." The notes for the NET (which chose a translation of "king") state: "tn Heb "the king." Since the context refers to idolatry and child sacrifice (see v. 5), some emend מלך (melekh, "king") to "Molech." Perhaps Israel's devotion to her idols is likened here to a subject taking tribute to a ruler." While it is possible that "Molech" is what was intended, there is no ancient witness that supports this translation but there are ancient witnesses that support the translation of "king."

While it is entirely valid for you to prefer a version that uses "Molech," it is entirely invalid to suggest that other translations have misunderstood the Hebrew text, or have incorrectly read the pointings, etc...

 

[now faith]

From experience I can tell you what he is teaching is from the Word of Faith camp, he's just thrown in some Hebrew words (and/or Hebrew Roots type teachings which are incomplete to say the least).
To me messing around with the language (which is rotten and attempts to change what is actually written) is bad enough but the WoF part is dangerous and unscriptural. WoF is just wrong. As you read, what it comes down to is that if you're not able to walk on the water it's because you have not "heard" God or the Spirit tell you to do so, if you have not "heard" from God then you're not in God's will, or maybe not even His, etc. See where all that is leading to? Dangerous!

I disagree , on the teaching considered to be WOF. Quote( So, conclusion, go to the extreme in spending time in the holy spirits presence.. like 12 hours a day or something.. go to church less, read the bible less, work less, waste ur time less on spare time activities, spend more time with the holy spirit.. And then practice acting on what the holy spirit tells you.. Practice by asking him for road directon, and see if he gets you there.. Practice with prophetic evangelism.. And so on). We do not teach the Holy Spirit is to be exulted over Christ, Faith Cometh by hearing and hearing by the Word of God. We believe the Bible is the Word of God from the beginning. We believe that all spirits are not sent by God, we must test our revelation by Gods Word (Bible ) We believe in forsake not the assembling of yourselves, praise and worship , teaching ,preaching ,are inherent in WOF churches . I do not want to debate, but many who are assumed to be WOF, are not. God bless

 

[now faith]

I am familiar with the paleo-hebrew pictograph meanings. Dr Frank Seekins is at least missing a several of the letter alternate definitions.

Mem - waters can also be a reference to people. This is referenced all over the scriptures. David talks about his enemies being a 'flood' and waves. In Revelation the harlot is over Many Waters that the angel declares are 'peoples, tribes, nations and tongues'. The association between 'waters' and 'people' is common. We are waters. We are made mostly of water. Birth begins with the 'breaking of the water'. We are conceived in an exchange of 'waters'. The 'waters above' are the angelic beings while the 'waters below' are the earthly beings. The voice of 'many waters' is a great multitude.

An example is the word MLK, (melek - king or molech 'shameful king'). Water, authority, open hand becomes the 'hand of authority over the waters/people' is a king. The biblical example is Moses with his hand on the staff and his hand over the waters that parts the Red Sea and leads the people to safety. A true king is a shepherd, a leader, not a dictator.

Ayin - eye, fountain, source of waters, even vaginal opening. The different forms of Ayin could have been drawn either vertically or horizontally.

A good example of this alternate meaning is the word Da'at which means 'knowledge'. Dalet-ayin-tav or 'doorway, eye, cross/covenant', is to use the 'doorway of the eye to read scripture' is to gain 'knowledge'. It is NOT general knowledge but 'knowledge of covenant'. When it is used in the form of 'carnal knowledge' it is 'doorway, vagina, covenant' or to 'use the doorway of the vagina in the covenant of marriage'. This is how the same word can have alternate meanings by using the alternate letter meanings. It has to be taken from the context in the modern Hebrew but in the paleo-hebrew they could draw the letters differently for the alternate meanings. Sometimes Da'at is used for 'carnal knowlege' and sometimes 'yada' is used.

Dr Seekins tends to leave out any of the sexual references probably out of some sense of puritanism or he just plain doesn't know them.

Now for reference, I am not an expert in Hebrew. I only had one semester in bible college but by learning the paleo-hebrew pictographs it helped to be able to see and remember the vocabulary meanings.

I learned enough Hebrew to be able to use an interlinear and to understand how things got translated the way they did. It also helped to find errors within the vowel pointing.

A good example of a place that most translations have an error is Isa 57:9. They translate MLK as 'king' when the passage is talking about the paganism of Baalim worship in the grove above and the killing of the children in the valley below. It is a reference to Molech worship in the valley of Himmom. If the individuals didn't understand the context, they vowel pointed MLK as melek instead of Molech. Translators used the wrong vowel pointed word in most translations. The Amplified says 'king [or Molech]' to show it is debated.

A good example of a place that most translations have an error is Isa 57:9. They translate MLK as 'king' when the passage is talking about the paganism of Baalim worship in the grove above and the killing of the children in the valley below. It is a reference to Molech worship in the valley of Himmom. If the individuals didn't understand the context, they vowel pointed MLK as melek instead of Molech. Translators used the wrong vowel pointed word in most translations. The Amplified says 'king [or Molech]' to show it is debated. 57 verse 5 gives this context. Nice catch

 

[now faith]

Here is a copy of our belief. 1. We believe that when we repent, confess with our mouths that Jesus is Lord, and believe in our hearts that God raised Him from the dead, that we are now justified by His blood, and shall be saved from wrath through Him. (Romans 5:9, Romans 10:9-10)

2. We believe that we are new creatures made righteous with Christ's righteousness, which is not of ourselves. We are not "unworthy new creatures" nor "sinners saved by grace". We were once sinners, but now we are saved by grace; our spirits born again, created in righteousness and true holiness; Sons of God, and joint heirs with Jesus.(2 Corinthians 5:17, Philippians 3:9, Ephesians 2:5-8, Ephesians 4:24, Galatians 4:6, Romans 8:17)

3. We believe in the Doctrine of Sanctification as a definite, yet progressive work of grace, commencing at the time of regeneration, and continuing until the consummation of salvation at Christ's return. (John 17:17-19)

4. We believe the Baptism in the Holy Ghost is a gift from God to all believers in this dispensation. It is received separately from the new birth, and is accompanied by the ability to speak in other tongues, as the Holy Spirit Himself gives utterance. (John 15:26, Acts 2:4)

5. We believe that water baptism should be by immersion in the Name of the Father, and the Son, and the Holy Ghost. It is a symbol of the Christian's identification with Christ in His death, burial, and resurrection. (Matthew 3:16, Romans 6:1-4)

6. We believe prosperity is always God's will for all believers; for the whole person, spirit, soul, and body. The Lord has pleasure in the prosperity of those who serve Him. (3 John 1:2, Psalm 35:27)

7. We believe divine healing is always God's will for all believers; for the whole person, body, soul, and spirit, and is wrought by the power of God. Jesus healed all who were oppressed of the devil. (Acts10:38, 1 Peter 2:24)

8. We believe that all of the Promises of God are always yes and amen, never no; that they are provided for in the atonement of Christ, and are the privilege of every member of the Body of Christ today who will receive them by faith. (2 Corinthians 1:20)

9. We believe that the faith to receive any of the Promises of God comes from hearing God's Word alone; that God's Word is alive and powerful, and every Promise therein contains the faith of God, sufficient to bring itself to pass in the life of any person who believes His Promise in their heart, and confesses it with their mouth. What God has so wonderfully provided by His grace we receive by faith. (Romans 10:17, Hebrews 4:12)

10. We believe that in all things pertaining to life on earth, God is the Author of all that is good; it is only the devil who comes to steal, kill and destroy. God never tempts us, nor uses any element of the curse (Deut. 28) to teach us; He only teaches us by His Holy Spirit revealing to us, the truth of His Holy Word. (John 10:10, James 1:13, Psalm 119:105, John 16:13, Deuteronomy 28)

11. We believe God gave all mankind free will and dominion over the world that we live in; and gave all Christians His kingdom authority and power, to walk as Sons of God, in the steps of Jesus, Who was our example in all things. By way of the leading of the Holy Spirit, we are to take dominion over circumstances and situations, and enforce His Covenant Promises on earth, through the power of His Words spoken out of our mouth. We believe that when we speak in full agreement with His Word, we can have what we ask. (John 1:12, Mark 11:22-24, Luke 9:1, James 4:7, 1 John 3:22)

12. We believe Jesus, in His life and ministry on earth, demonstrated God's perfect will for the earth in all matters for all time. He was made to be sin for us, and was spiritually separated from the presence of the Father on the cross in our place; He descended into hell, was raised up by God the Father, loosed from the pains of death, and was the firstborn from the dead. (John 14:9-12, 2 Corinthians 5:21, Matthew 27:46, Mark 15:34, Acts 2:24, Colossians 1:18)

13. We believe that all scripture, comprised of the 66 Books of the Bible (no apocrypha) from Genesis to Revelation, is the Word of God, and is our final authority over all else for determining faith and practice.

 

[rakovsky]

A little bonus, what does God’s name mean on Hebrew: Yahweh and Elohim:
Yehovah 3068: Hand, :5. Hey=man with two hands stretched up- revelation, to reveal, grace (the, to reveal)
, nail, :5. Hey=man with two hands stretched up- revelation, to reveal, grace (the, to reveal)
: Th

First letter is hand, so basicly ruling or something, and then there is two letters for revelation… Revelation is a big thing in this name..

I find the issue interesting, because some ancient alphabets like Chinese did use pictures as their means to write out words. So if the Chinese wrote out "arm, behold, nail, behold" in pictures like the Hebrews did and then said that it was the name of God - Wow, that would be remarkable, wouldn't it? It would mean that the Chinese actually understood God's name to mean exactly that.

The big challenge unfortunately I see is that Hebrew is a language script like Greek and English that works on phonetics but whose drawings originally did match certain pictures. The drawn A in English ultimately has the same root drawing form source as the A in Hebrew. pretty neat, right?

The thing is that when you see an A in English, can you see any indication at all that it must mean something based on its originally drawn picture?
I expect 95+% of Americans, Canadians, etc. will probably say No.

So you really need some credited unversity official scholarship backing you up before making these claims with major confidence.

I am not sure that you are wrong. Maybe you are right. I actually don't have an opinion, because it turns out that Jewish writers over the centuries got heavily into mysticism about letters and the name YHWH.

But I want to see real professional scholarship on this stuff.

Anyway, I made a thread about it here:
Judaism Issue: Has anyone in the past read YHWH's letters acronymically per their pictoral meaning?