[b-hebrew] Ssade Can Be Emphatic Sin

JimStinehart at aol.com JimStinehart at aol.com
Wed Nov 21 17:23:52 EST 2012

1.  You  wrote:  “Are you trying to resurrect  your argument from Feb. four 
years ago?” 
I have done considerable additional research since  then.  Back then, I 
honestly didn’t  know that scholars have never come up with a satisfactory 
explanation of  Joseph’s Egyptian name, with Steindorff’s 1899 attempt being 
much-criticized but  never supplanted.  Nor did I realize  the key issue of 
whether Hebrew ssade could be D in Egyptian or s in  Egyptian. 
2.  You  wrote:  “Don’t neglect the  linguistic pronunciation 
substitutions that may have changed greatly the  pronunciation of the Egyptian language 
used about 3,900 years ago when Joseph  lived, to when it was first 
transliterated to alphabetic language over a  millennium later. Therefore, short of 
finding his name in hieroglyphics, any  translation of his name will be 
highly speculative and impossible to  prove.” 
Along those very lines, the scholarly community keeps  looking for an 
attested Egyptian name as the basis for Joseph’s Egyptian  name.  There is none.  
That’s why scholars can’t make sense of  Joseph’s Egyptian name.  In fact, 
 the early Hebrew author of the Patriarchal narratives created Joseph’s 
Egyptian  name, using 4 super-simple Egyptian common words.  Let’s take a look, 
and solve this  3,000-year-old Biblical mystery once and for all. 
Per my prior post, if the Hebrew ssade/C at the beginning  of Joseph’s 
Egyptian name is an emphatic sin, and hence is the Egyptian letter  s, then the 
first word in Joseph’s Egyptian name is sA, meaning “son”.  Now all of 
Joseph’s Egyptian name is  child’s play to figure out:  C P NT  P (NX. 
Each peh/P is pA, meaning “the” in Egyptian.  In the New  Kingdom, pA/“the”
 before a divine name had a monotheistic  connotation.  To highlight that 
key  fact, I will render this Egyptian word pA with a capital T in English:  “
Steindorff and the overwhelming majority view of scholars  are right as to 
the other two Egyptian words.  NT is nTr, meaning “god” or “God” or  “the 
divine”.  The Hebrew rendering  has no resh/R at the end, because as 
Egyptian linguist Loprieno points out, a  final R in multi-syllable Egyptian words 
was undergoing “lenition” in the  New Kingdom, and in Late Egyptian was not 
 pronounced at all.  This Egyptian  word was probably pronounced ne-tje(r), 
and such a 2-syllable Egyptian word  would be expected to be rendered by 2 
Hebrew letters:  nun-tav/NT.  [That is the overwhelming majority view  of 
scholars, and I agree with it.]  The one and only word for which there has 
always been unanimous agreement  is (NX, which clearly is anx, misleadingly 
spelled “ankh” in English.  This is probably a 3-syllable Egyptian  word, 
khe-ne-xe, that rhymes with “Hannukah”.  The Egyptian word anx means “life” or 
 “eternal life” or “to live”. 
C P NT = sA pA nTr.  On the first level, that beginning of Joseph’s 
Egyptian name is somewhat  similar to sA ra, which was the grandest and best-known 
pharaonic title,  befitting the fact that Joseph has just now been given 
powers that are almost  equivalent to that of a Pharaoh.  But on another level, 
taking note of the monotheistic word pA/“The”,  Joseph has in effect been 
more or less adopted as a “son” by a Pharaoh who  worships pA nTr, “The 
[one and only] God”.  pA nTr may well be an abbreviated form of the phrase pA 
nTr wa that  appears in Akhenaten’s Great Hymn to the Aten, which is the most 
monotheistic  phrase possible in the Egyptian language:  “The one and only 
The word sA appears frequently in Akhenaten’s Great Hymn  to the Aten, as 
Akhenaten insists that he is the “son” of Aten.  We see the phrase sA ra, 
followed by  anx, in the last verse of such Hymn, which can be compared to 
both sA pA nTr  above and pA anx below in Joseph’s Egyptian name. 
Continuing on with this monotheistic theme, the rest of  Joseph’s Egyptian 
name is P (NX = pA anx, which can be compared to the following  three 
phrases in the Great Hymn to the Aten:  itn, followed by anx;  pA itn;  sA ra, 
followed by anx.  The implied phrase pA itn anx  means:  “The [one and only] 
Aten  lives eternally”.  [Absent the deity  name itn or ra being implied in 
the middle of pA anx, the phrase “The eternal  life” would seem a bit odd.]  
pA anx  works perfectly as an abbreviated version of either pA itn anx or pA 
ra anx,  recognizing [as to that latter implied phrase] that after Year 9 
Akhenaten used  a Ra-based name for his deity, no longer the name itn/Aten.  
[In Egyptian inscriptions, anx would  customarily begin a new standard 
phrase praising the deity.  In Joseph’s name, we have only  anx.] 
So Akhenaten’s most famous and most highly monotheistic  phrases from his 
Great Hymn to the Aten seem to be present in Joseph’s Egyptian  name in 
abbreviated form.  First, pA  nTr = pA nTr wa:  “The one and only  God”.  
Second, pA anx combines itn  anx and pA itn, effectively being pA itn anx:  “The 
[one and only] Aten lives  eternally”.  But since “itn” does  not literally 
appear in Joseph’s Egyptian name, perhaps the implied phrase here  
[post-Year 9] is actually pA ra anx:  “The [one and only] Ra lives eternally”. 
This Egyptian name for Joseph could only have been  created in Year 14, 
when Akhenaten was at the height of his monotheistic  zeal.  [As to the exact 
date of Year  14, Genesis 14: 5 refers to “the fourteenth year”, immediately 
after the express  reference at Genesis 14: 4 to:  “Year 13”.]  The early 
Hebrew  author who created this name was hoping that pharaoh Akhenaten might 
help the  Hebrews stay in their homeland in south-central Canaan, after the 
Amorite  princeling ruler Milk-Ilu [whose historical name is honored and 
set forth at  Genesis 46: 17], whose Patriarchal nickname at Genesis 14: 13 is 
“Mamre the  Amorite”, died in early Year 14, succeeded by his awful 
firstborn son  Yapaxu.  [That’s why 7 of 7  firstborn sons in the Patriarchal 
narratives are portrayed as getting the shaft  and properly so:  Haran, Lot, 
Ishmael, Esau,  Reuben, Er, Manasseh.]    
Not surprisingly, Akhenaten in fact did not lift a finger  to help the 
first Hebrews.  The  pre-Hebrews historically became the Hebrews when they 
finally realized late in  Year 14 that Akhenaten would be of no help to the 
Hebrews whatsoever.  From now on, the first Hebrews had to  trust solely in YHWH. 
 Historically,  that’s what happened in Year 14, which was the historical 
birth of Judaism.  The Patriarchal narratives record that  historical event 
of earth-shaking importance with a pinpoint historical accuracy  that is 
possible only for a contemporary who knew exactly what he was talking  about 
(and who was utterly brilliant to boot).  The scholarly claim that the 
Patriarchal  narratives are “late” and “oral folklore” is akin to, and is just as  
unconvincing as, the scholarly misunderstanding [dating back to 1899] of  
Joseph’s Egyptian name. 
Jim StinehartEvanston,  Illinois
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.ibiblio.org/pipermail/b-hebrew/attachments/20121121/c3101652/attachment.html 

More information about the b-hebrew mailing list