[b-hebrew] Hebrew language and thought forms

davidfentonism at aim.com davidfentonism at aim.com
Wed Nov 22 17:04:15 EST 2006


  Yes, and so the biblical Hebrew corresponded to its own cosmology which was Elohist/Yahvist. It was not inclusive of the ideologies of its neighbors or enemies, thus what it meant then is what it means today. The Hebrew is also dynamic and the Greek static, and in that sense incompetent to fully communicate Hebrew thoghtforms as seen in the examples provided by others (i.e., tsedakah/righteousness, Torah/Law, etc.).
 
 David 
 -----Original Message-----
 From: peter at qaya.org
 To: davidfentonism at aim.com
 Cc: b-hebrew at lists.ibiblio.org
 Sent: Mon, 20 Nov 2006 5:00 PM
 Subject: Re: [b-hebrew] Hebrew language and thought forms
 
  On 20/11/2006 21:50, davidfentonism at aim.com wrote: 
 > But in the case of the (paleo) Hebrew, its very alphabet (i.e., its characters) are derived from pictograms of the things Adam named (e.g., animals, trees, father, etc.). This is what I have read, at least. ... 
 
 Yes, and it is equally true of our alphabet, which is as much derived from palaeo-Hebrew as the more modern Hebrew alphabet is. With some of our letters it is still obvious in the forms: "O" is derived from a picture of an eye (Hebrew `ayin, also a circle in palaeo-Hebrew), "M" is derived from a picture of water (waves) (Hebrew mem/mayim). 
 
 So what? 
 
 -- Peter Kirk 
 E-mail: peter at qaya.org 
 Blog: http://speakertruth.blogspot.com/ 
 Website: http://www.qaya.org/ 
 
       
________________________________________________________________________
Check Out the new free AIM(R) Mail -- 2 GB of storage and industry-leading spam and email virus protection.



More information about the b-hebrew mailing list