Comments on: Wordplay in Genesis https://www.biblicalarchaeology.org/scholars-study/wordplay-in-genesis/ Tue, 25 Apr 2023 01:06:34 +0000 hourly 1 https://wordpress.org/?v=6.7.2 By: Michael E Smith https://www.biblicalarchaeology.org/scholars-study/wordplay-in-genesis/#comment-2000271163 Tue, 25 Apr 2023 01:06:34 +0000 https://www.biblicalarchaeology.org/?p=64396#comment-2000271163 In reply to Ryan.

Oops…..I was typing fast and of COURSE Ishmael is a son of Abraham as well, please forgive this error made in haste but I hope you get where I was coming from.

]]> By: Michael E Smith https://www.biblicalarchaeology.org/scholars-study/wordplay-in-genesis/#comment-2000271162 Tue, 25 Apr 2023 01:00:56 +0000 https://www.biblicalarchaeology.org/?p=64396#comment-2000271162 In reply to Ryan.

Thank you Ryan. Although I was able to separate the FACT from the FICTION of this blog entry, I have to commend it’s author for DISREGARDING the Masoretic tampering of the scriptures and INVOKING the name of YHWH. I would be VERY interested in further dialogue concerning linguistics especially as it relates to Yud, Hey, Wav, Hey, of the tetragrammaton, whose Paleo Hebrew Pictographic MEANING was only recently revealed to me as HAND, Behold, Nail (Which Adds All Things Together) Behold. IF the unrepentant Sons of Abraham AND the Sons of Ismael living today suddenly became AWARE of this fact, the face of our world might CHANGE rapidly. Believe it or not. As you wish. Shalom! (NOT PEACE….Wholeness of the WORD within you.)

]]> By: Ryan https://www.biblicalarchaeology.org/scholars-study/wordplay-in-genesis/#comment-2000050528 Tue, 28 Jul 2020 22:04:56 +0000 https://www.biblicalarchaeology.org/?p=64396#comment-2000050528 Oh, where to begin.
1. The Hebrew story is not a “borrowing” from other tales, in fact, it is the opposite. I can prove this via Linguistics. All languages on earth derived from Hebrew, not any other language. You can go through all languages on earth, and see their root, from the Hebrew language. Just because we don’t have the “original texts,” dating back to Adamas time period, does not mean “we can rule out Hebrew as the first language.” We can see clear evidence of every language on earth deriving from its Hebrew ancestor.

2. Clearly the author has a prejudice against the Biblical texts and origins, or he/she would have never attempted to make such a ludicrous statement as “these names possibly derive from Sumerian or Akkadian origins.” That is outlandish to say the least.

3. As someone that has spent his lifetime studying linguistics, it is evident and clear to see how Hebrew was the original first language. There is no such person in the Scriptures as “Hawah,” you are referring to “Chawah” which means “mother of living.”

]]>