It is suggested before reading this paper, that part 1 of this series "Origin and Essential Elements"

is read.

It is expedient that the basics of the Paleo Hebrew language be understood before we continue

with the comparison of it and the Greek mind set.

There are many misconceptions about the language of the Old Testament. The majority of these

come from the false idea that the "Classical Hebrew" as taught by Jewish Rabbin for centuries is

the language of Scripture. In truth "Classical Hebrew" was the result of combining a host of

Babylonian dialects and ideas. The majority of it’s application was from the fall of Jerusalem in

70 AD to 500 AD when the finishing touches were being added to both the language and the

documents they possessed. This period was one of codifying the "traditions of the elders" so

scornfully reproached by Yahshua into the Babylonian and Jerusalem Talmuds. While this was

being done the majority of the Old Testament was translated from the original Hebrew into the

same language as the other rabbinical works. This whole period deserves a great amount of

attention, which at this point we cannot afford. The important part for now is to establish that the

language of David, Abraham and Isaiah was not the language of the Rabbinical scholars of the

middle ages. It is not in the "Hebrew" of the descendants of the Pharisees that we are interested,

to as Paleo Hebrew, Phoenician, or North Semetic. This is what we will hereafter call "Hebrew".

Probably the greatest misconception about Hebrew is that it has no vowels. Josephus says

otherwise; "...A mitre also of fine linen encompassed his head ... about which there was another

Josephus lived long before the vowel pointing of Rabbinical Hebrew was employed. He was

Josephus was not alone in this assumption. Weingreen states, "However long before the

introduction of vowel-signs it was felt that the main vowel-signs should be indicated in writing,

waw, hey, and yod. R. Laird Harris writes in his "Introductory Hebrew Grammar", "Four of the

though Gesenius contends that "Hebrew has no vowels" he admits in chapter 1 section 7 of his

"Hebrew Grammar" that in antiquity the above letters acted as vowels. Some will also add to this

So, even the experts agree that in antiquity, prior to the revision by the scribes of this era, Hebrew

contained five letters that could be considered, or at least could be used like, vowels.

The five vowels of the English language are A, E, I, O, and U, with of course the optional sixth

"Y". The Random House Webster’s College Dictionary (copyright 1991) says the ancestor of

Well, if they look like vowels, act like vowels, and our modern vowels are descended from them;

perhaps Hebrew has vowels!!!

The following chart lists all twenty two of the Paleo Hebrew characters. It compares them with

the characters of Babylonian Hebrew. Also listed are the modern English equivalent, Post

Babylonian Numerical equivalent, and allegorical meaning of each letter.

Column 1 is the original Paleo Hebrew character, followed by it’s name. Notice the clear, simple

structure of the letters. Also notice the resemblance of the Paleo Hebrew letter to it’s English

offspring in column 3.

The second column is the Babylonian (or Classical Hebrew) character as used by the Talmudic

scribes since the Babylonian exile, and especially since the destruction of Jerusalem by Titus.

Notice the intricacy, and in many cases similarity of the letters to each other. This can create a

great deal of confusion when reading from this text.

Column 4 is the numerical equivalent as ascribed since the Babylonian exile. Some suggest this

system was an offshoot of Babylonian satanic numerology. Others suggest this system was

originally a part of the Hebrew language. I honestly do not know. I have included it so that each

student has the opportunity to seek the matter on their own.

Column 5 gives the allegorical meaning of each of the Paleo Hebrew letters. All numbers

following the "#" sign are the Strong’s number of the respective letter’s name. When a secular or

work unrelated to Strong’s gave a significantly different definition, it is listed and the reference

noted. This is the most incredible part of the whole language. This is the way the word meanings

were maintained.

In the final column the meanings are divided into "verbs, nouns, pre-modifiers, and postmodifiers."

(Although it is possible to be an adjective or adverb as well.) In Hebrew, prepositions, pronouns

and articles are represented by a single letter being added either to the end or beginning of a word.

A pre-modifier is a letter added to the beginning of a word. A post-modifier is a letter added to

the end of a word.

Hebrew sentences can be rather different from English. Hebrew has "clauses" rather than

complete statements like those with which we are familiar. These clauses may be linked to form

complete sentences, or can stand alone. There are two principle forms of clauses; the noun clause

noun clause. Noun clauses are arranged very similarly to English sentences; subject, predicate,

is the simplified version. Within the text of scripture it can be very complex, and poetic.

This is obviously important to understanding the idea conveyed by a phrase. In Gen 1:1 was it

Elohym who created the Heavens and the Earth, or did the Heavens and the Earth create

Elohym? The Hebrew structure clearly establishes that it was Elohym that did the "creating" and

the Heavens and the Earth were the things being created. Without the above knowledge

establishing a clear understanding of a passage or a word can be not only confusing, but can be in

error.

The first step in establishing the allegorical meaning of a word is to reduce it to a prim. root. This

will normally be a three letter word, or occasionally a two letter word. If Strongs suggests a

word with more than three letters is a root, it has mistakenly included a preposition, pronoun or

article (a pre or post-modifier). Carefully decide which of the letters is (are) the culprit(s), and

remove it to establish the root.

Once the root has been found the next step is to confirm if the word is being used as a verb or a

noun. Just like English many words can be used as both and context is necessary to ascertain

which is intended in any given situation.

If the word is a noun, the letters can be viewed as arranged like a noun clause. Thus the first

letter will be a noun (subject), the second the verb (predicate), and the third a noun (object),

Speaking, Instruction."

Many words can be almost comical in the pictures they draw, but a deeper or fuller meaning is

always ascertained.

Verbs are a little more difficult. Remember their order is different than that to which we are

"Leading (often a "head" can mean a "leader") to the Fountain of Light."

This area needs more scientific, Spirit led research. The majority of the study in this area has been

very "subjective" without many "objective" rules being established. The more I work with the

system, the more I can "feel" the order and logic of it. Unfortunately I cannot yet say I

thoroughly understand all the "rules", but I am confident they exist. Nor have I found many who

seem to understand the absolutes of the language. Nearly everyone appears to "make it up as

they go". This is unacceptable. As the language is studied it’s order and relation to absolutes is

obvious. These laws exist, they simply need to be re-discovered.

Another area that needs true scientific and detailed research is the phonetic values of each letter.

By fixing the English equivalent we jump forward considerably. However, if Hebrew had vowels

it must have phonetic rules. Webster tried to keep these ancient rules in tact when he codified our

American language, but Hebrew letters are not directly like English, so there still needs to be

much careful research.

each of the other letters carry with them a "supplied" vowel. It is uncomfortable at first to grasp,

(Remember Hebrew is written from right to left) The second is beyth it has the "b" sound just as

you ever wondered what spelling would be like if our English "b" actually held the phonetic value

pronounce "beyth" at the beginning or middle of a word it has the phonetic value of "be" (as in

pronunciations get complicated. Beyth, yod, tau Beyth, as the first letter, would be pronounced

"Be" as in "bed". Yod is a vowel having the "y" or "i" sound. Tau can be either "t" or "th". I

suggest the vowel (yod) softens the tau to "th" (as in "things") and the beyth retains its supplied

vowel. I therefore believe St # 1004 should be pronounced "beyth". Many support this idea.

This is my best estimation, but as I said this is an area that requires further research. It is also

possible that the yod as a modifying vowel (similar in ways to a final "e") is silent. In this case the

simple pronunciation would be "beth".

This most ancient of languages has been silent for centuries. It has been counterfeited by falsefriends,

and denigrated by pseudo-scholars. In these ways it is much like the Truth it was meant

to convey. Even with almost relentless attack it has stood the test of time and remains a stalwart

monument to the wisdom of its author, Yahweh. It, like its Creator, is vast, perhaps more so than

we can now comprehend, but not unknowable.

Modified Monday, July 13, 2009