The Strong's Deception

I've used "The New Strong's Expanded Dictionary of Bible Words" for years. It does give a more in depth look at the words and their usage. But I also like to look at the root of a word, and the words connected to that root, to try to understand what connects them. I heard a Jewish Rabbi recently talk about studying particular words, so even people who know Hebrew, who are interested, dig deeper.
Or am I completely missing your point?

HARK! said:

Many of the words that have multiple Strong's numbers, that I have covered so far, are two letter roots. We saw this right out of the gate with אב.

Click to expand...

It is important to note that the ancient Hebrew language was not Authored by men, nevertheless many stand in Doubt or Disbelief of this Divine fact, and subsequently mingle the teachings of men with the teachings of Torah, which clearly disagrees with the teachings of men, in that, we are to Establish Every דברים Word, Matter and Thing by the פן Mouth/(Tri-)angulation of Two or Three;

Those who teach otherwise make themselves apostate.

There is only One who walks amongst us that has access to the truth of every scripture, and that is the Lamb, the members of his Body only know in part, those which feign to know everything one needs to know, they are of the many which come in the name of H'meshiakh yet deceive themselves and those which heed their Doctrine.

HARK! said:

דבר

H1696, H1697, H1698, H1699

Click to expand...

In an English dictionary we will find the word 'do' under various entries, 'done, don't, do' and under entries with variant spelling 'did, didn't' and this far from being an isolated case.

Take the word 'friend for instance, ' friend, friendly, friendship' all with a separate entry.

The word אב may render Chief, or Official' yet when it is used in a title it is not treated as being separate from the word it is prefixed to, i.e., Chief Butler, Chief Musician, etc., in these cases the words are not seen as independent from one another, they are treated as a single formula, and Strong's simply records them as such, I am unable to see what you are finding deceptive about this.

H1696 דבר (daw-bar)
H1697 דבר (daw-bawr)
H1698 דבר (deh-ber)
H1699 דבר (do-ber, dib-bare)

If you were to see (and treat) them phonetically as we do in English then perhaps you could begin to understand why they are listed under various entries.

In cases where we find two Phonetical representations it is simply a case of tomātoe-tomätoe.

The separate entries show the consistency of various enunciations Used and their ascribed meanings.

If Strong's presented a format like Webster's dictionary you probably would not have a problem with the concept of separate entries, we would only see the word דבר written once,, and the separate case entries would simply be enumerated and logged accordingly under 1(st entry(, 2(nd entry, 3(rd entry), etc., whereas Strong's format ]does not enumerate the entries as Webster's does, there is nothing deceptive about this, just a different way of presenting case entries.

Notwithstanding, due to the Example provided in Yeremiyahu 1:11, I believe we should see the various case entries as Webster's presents case entries, under a single heading, which (correct me if I'm mistaken) is how you feel they should be presented, even if we agree on that point, our belief on presenting a different format does not make Strong's format deceptive.

HARK! said:

Let's start right from the beginning, H1.

In Ancient Hebrew, the Aleph depicts an ox head. The Greeks took the Aleph-Bet, and inverted the otiot, turned them upside down, and wrote them backwards, which evolved into our modern alphabet.

The modern inverted aleph gives us the letter A. It still depicts an ox head, only turned upside down. To this day, it still represents the "A" sound, as in "Aleph;" Yet the rules of Modern Hebrew say that Aleph is silent; and that by adding niqqud to Yah's word; we can make it say whatever we want.

Each ote has a meaning unto itself. Thereby the meaning of his word remains, for those who seek to understand it.

Again Aleph depicts an ox head. It can be interpreted as headship or strength.

The Bet depicts a tent or a house. (As a side note the niqqud sometimes render B as a V; and there was no V sound in Ancient Hebrew.)

AB can be interpreted as the head of the house, or father.

Click to expand...

For starters, any אות Symbol bearing a depiction of any Beast (such as an Ox, Camel, Serpent, etc.), is in direct violation of Torah, see Deut. 4

Secondly, the Ancient Hebrew Language is a Pidgin Language having No fixed Spelling or Pronunciation as found in what we refer to as a Formal Language, the Masorete knew this to be true, but the ruling class wanted everyone to be on the same page, presenting themselves as the agents sent to fulfill Zephaniah 3, and have us all קרא Calling on/Reading the Name (of Yahuah with one Consent;

And it was they (the ruling class) that chose the knowledge of One Masorete, not Two or Three, and with his knowledge they (the ruling class) Fixed the punctuation of the Torah, so that it would influence everyone to read the diverse Torah (only) one way, inadvertently veiling the natural diversity of the language;

No one had a monopoly on the original language, so to say there was no V, J. or Vowels only shows the extent of one's limited knowledge, for the Pidgin Hebrew Tongue incorporated all of these features, and it was not only Segregation and Prejudice that the House was divided, 70 years of captivity in foreign cultures literally tore the native tongue into shreds, leaving here a little and there a little, just enough for us to repair the breach.


Thirdly, the so called Aleph Bet, is a Greek influenced invention, the Hebrew Alphabet is referred to as the Aleph Ū Tau, which spells אות Symbols, and yet if punctuated just so, it could actually enunciate, Aleph-Vet;

Otherwise א Aleph represents the only pure (unstressed) Vowel sound, i.e., the schwa sound, it is the 'a' in Adobe, 'e' in The, 'i' in Accident, 'o' in Abbott, and the 'u' in Butt;

Otherwise א Aleph also represents the consonantal Glottal stop, producing an abrupt stop, or enunciating what our ear and mind perceives to be the (unarticulated) 'T' sound found in the word 'Alphabet'.

It is only their ignorance and or inability to explain this that they say it is unexpressed or not represented in English, for those whom others look unto for answers cannot say, I don't know!, people will begin to look elsewhere:

I assure you they were not trying to hide the truth, one would first need to be in possession of the Truth before they could deliberately attempt that feat, and yet as promised, knowledge has been increased.

When the א is found in the Torah prefixed to a word it equates to a truncation of אני and or אנוכי lit., 'I' yet variously renders אהיה I am, I have, and I will/shall, depending on the context, whereas the word 'I' literally means, 'The Person Speaking (or writing)' ,

Laureate said:

For starters, any אות Symbol bearing a depiction of any Beast (such as an Ox, Camel, Serpent, etc.), is in direct violation of Torah, see Deut. 4

Click to expand...

Not much of a start. A pictogram depicting an ox head to symbolize 'strength' is hardly the same as setting up an idol for worship or deification. Nor do your assumptions about scripts square with scripture or the timeline associated with the various Semitic scripts. May I presume from this that the Hebrew script of Torah is now, by your estimation, an abomination to it's own Author? I cannot fathom how you could be any further off base.

Laureate said:

Secondly, the Ancient Hebrew Language is a Pidgin Language having No fixed Spelling or Pronunciation as found in what we refer to as a Formal Language, the Masorete knew this to be true, but the ruling class wanted everyone to be on the same page, presenting themselves as the agents sent to fulfill Zephaniah 3, and have us all קרא Calling on/Reading the Name (of Yahuah with one Consent;

Click to expand...

I have no idea how you can make these statements with any degree of seriousness. There are so many erroneous assumptions in your statements that any attempt to discuss your assertions would be tantamount to acknowledging the absurd as fact. So, concerning Hebrew being a 'Pidgin' language and/or not having fixed spelling or that the Masorets even existed in the Late Second Temple period, I can only respond; 'Citations Please' (content in the sure knowledge that you will find none of any good repute).

Laureate said:

And it was they (the ruling class) that chose the knowledge of One Masorete, not Two or Three, and with his knowledge they (the ruling class) Fixed the punctuation of the Torah, so that it would influence everyone to read the diverse Torah (only) one way, inadvertently veiling the natural diversity of the language;

Click to expand...

Huh? What? Is this a joke? One 'Masorete'? And what 'ruling class'?

Laureate said:

No one had a monopoly on the original language, so to say there was no V, J. or Vowels only shows the extent of one's limited knowledge, for the Pidgin Hebrew Tongue incorporated all of these features, and it was not only Segregation and Prejudice that the House was divided, 70 years of captivity in foreign cultures literally tore the native tongue into shreds, leaving here a little and there a little, just enough for us to repair the breach.

Click to expand...

Whaaat? 'No one had a monopoly on the original language'? What does that even mean?

Have you no knowledge of the script carved on rocks in the Negev in the days of Joseph or the folded lead sheet containing Hebrew script on Mount Ebal across the valley from Mount Gerizim? Both mountains were designated by God for the reading of His blessings and curses that Israel would incur for obeying or disobeying His law. Can you name the script used in that ceremony?

Scholarly sources fix the work of the 'Masorets' as occurring between the 5th to the 10th centuries C.E., with a certain few claiming the work continued into the 13th century C.E. while even more asserting the work continues even today in order to counter the slang of modern 'street' Hebrew. For a VERY basic overview of the Masorets, See: (Masoretes - Wikipedia)

Laureate said:

Thirdly, the so called Aleph Bet, is a Greek influenced invention, the Hebrew Alphabet is referred to as the Aleph Ū Tau, which spells אות Symbols, and yet if punctuated just so, it could actually enunciate, Aleph-Vet;

Otherwise א Aleph represents the only pure (unstressed) Vowel sound, i.e., the schwa sound, it is the 'a' in Adobe, 'e' in The, 'i' in Accident, 'o' in Abbott, and the 'u' in Butt;

Otherwise א Aleph also represents the consonantal Glottal stop, producing an abrupt stop, or enunciating what our ear and mind perceives to be the (unarticulated) 'T' sound found in the word 'Alphabet'.

It is only their ignorance and or inability to explain this that they say it is unexpressed or not represented in English, for those whom others look unto for answers cannot say, I don't know!, people will begin to look elsewhere:

Click to expand...

Well, it seems that you have certainly looked 'elsewhere' (wherever 'elsewhere' is) and have chosen to continue in that path. Seriously. None of this makes any sense at all.

Laureate said:

I assure you they were not trying to hide the truth, one would first need to be in possession of the Truth before they could deliberately attempt that feat, and yet as promised, knowledge has been increased.

Click to expand...

Aside from conflating 'truth' and 'knowledge', someone would have to have a pretty good grasp of what it means to conceal the truth without having possession of it - or even an inkling of what it is. Picture the great treasure of a Messianic mosaic concealed as a dirt floor; the one the archaeologist overlooked to pursue the dating of a Roman coin found embedded therein.

Laureate said:

When the א is found in the Torah prefixed to a word it equates to a truncation of אני and or אנוכי lit., 'I' yet variously renders אהיה I am, I have, and I will/shall, depending on the context, whereas the word 'I' literally means, 'The Person Speaking (or writing)' ,

Click to expand...

Uh, what language are we speaking here? Are Hebrew and English now somehow equivalent? You have completely lost me.

@daq, do you have any idea what Laureate is saying here? How does the addition or omission of the niqqud relate to this example? I'm completely lost.