bible pagan god yahweh's babylonian p...

““You must not lose faith ”

Since: Jun 11

Location hidden

#306 Jan 27, 2013
Where it all goes horribly wrong (as in let christians play with it)

quote:
You can also study a word by dissecting the different parts of the word. This article will give you a sample of this with the first word in Scripture. Written with English letters, it would be spelled b’rashyt, and pronounced something like “ber-a-sheet”. It is made up of the Hebrew letters bet, resh, aleph, shin, yod, tav.

The letter bet, which is the second letter of the Hebrew alphabet, means “house”. Since a house is something that you go in to, the letter bet, when used as a prefix to a word, means “in”. The remainder of the word means “beginning”. It is also the word that is translated as “first fruits” in Leviticus 23:10. In the New Testament, we are told in 1 Corinthians 15:22 that Jesus Christ is the Firstfruits. Extrapolating, this word can mean “In Jesus”.

The first two letters in the word, bet and resh, is the Hebrew word bar, which means son. You may be familiar with the use of this word in the Jewish phrase “bar mitzvah”, which is for boys, and “bat mitzvah” which is for girls. You see this word in verses like Daniel 3:25 and 7:13, in the phrases “Son of God”, and “Son of Man”.

The first three letters, bet, resh, and aleph spell the Hebrew word that is translated “create, shape, or form”. In fact, this word appears just a couple of words later than b’rshyt in Genesis 1:1. So just in those first three letters of this fascinating word, we have “son created”.

The last three letters, shin, yod, tav, spell out the word that is translated “appointed”(as in Genesis 4:25). The third and second to last letters, shin and yod, spell out the word “present”(as in gift) such as used in Psalm 68:29 and 76:11.

When putting all of this together, a recent newsletter from El Shaddai Ministries (El Shaddai is Hebrew for “God Almighty”), pastor Mark Biltz writes:“So, from the very "beginning" we see God so loved the world He gave and "appointed" His only begotten "Son" the one who "created" all things to be a "gift" becoming the "first-fruits" of His creation!”

end quote.
Nevermind that in/house and son and from and begin, suddenly seem to all convolute.
And that is using akkadian supposing a lot of changes.
at/when/in /a.s.o
from
begin/chief
Together reshyt usually means ruling council.
reshyt can also means chief/keep straight going, to become certain as the path of an arrow/and with forms of B-r divination, ruling, clarify.
b>r make a declaration and a measurement (6,48 hectares).
bara- would be complicate since we also find f.i. kane for actual smithing as in creating.
And for make, set or foundation we also find a different word sade(if i recall correctly)
Elohym: judges together-court
heaven and earth.

Reading bere shit, you would end up with the Marduk story, with the gods of heaven and earth.

According to ancient rules (see above) reshyt should refer back to bara (bere): chief rules, straight path are set.
Bara and elohym would form another pair.
With heaven and earth also involved.

And we have the possibility of br bara enforcing each other just like in akkadian.

Elohym can mean all godlyness combined in one.
Or a court ruled by actual elders.
Or the divine court.

Heaven and Earth used to be gods. So that might be why the sentence is so troubling.

Alef (1)When from/by)Chief straight rank/object would be to bring order to all follow the same path/rules governed elohym (gods and people) heaven and earth.

Taking the sample from the post above, we would get:
1 By restrictions rule judges heaven and earth.

““You must not lose faith ”

Since: Jun 11

Location hidden

#307 Jan 27, 2013
Correction asah- not sade.
Cognate Languages
The evidence from the Semitic languages provides some helpful information for the general understanding of bara’ and its related synonyms.
Akkadian, according to BDB, has the word baru (a III weak verb like Hebrew bara’) with the meaning “to make, create.” However, the more up-to-date Chicago Assyrian Dictionary does not give this as a meaning; rather, it defines baru A as ‘to look upon, to watch over,” and baru B as “to be hungry.”
BDB also suggests that Hebrew bara’ be compared with Assyrian banu (also a III weak verb) which in the G (= qal) stem means: 1) to build, construct, form,” 2)“to engender, produce,” 3)“to create”(the subject being the deity), and 4)“to devise a plan.” The correspondence of banu with bara’ would involve an interchange between the n and the r. Since both consonants are liquids they could interchange (note Hebrew “son” is ben but Aramaic is bar). The connection may be strengthened in view of the fact that banu is the verb used in the Mesopotamian creation story Enuma Elish:“[Ea] created (ibna ) mankind out of [Kingu’s] blood”(VI. 33).
If banu is a cognate word then more information would be available for the background of Hebrew bara’. But Hebrew also has a verb banah (III He’ verb), which means “to build.” Akkadian banu is most likely cognate to this word, and not bara’. In fact, in Genesis banah is used in addition to bara’:“and he [Yahweh] fashioned/built (wayyiben) the rib into the woman”(Gen. 2:22).
As for Ugaritic, there is no cognate for our verb as far as we know. In Ugaritic Textbook Gordon lists bnw/y,“to build,” as cognate to banah.
As a Phoenician cognate BDB lists a word meaning “incisor, a trade involving cutting.” This would be cognate to the second root bara’ and therefore not relevant to this word study (unless one argued that “cut” was a category of meaning under the verb, and then this would harmonize with that category).
In Arabic we have the cognate word bara’i (bary), which means “to form, fashion,” and BDB includes the meanings “to fashion by cutting, shaping out, to pare a reed for writing, a stick for an arrow.” These may be related to the second root. BDB also list bara’a as a loan word,“to create.” Old South Arabic has a root br’ that means “to build.” And Soqotri has a meaning “bring forth, give birth to.”

““You must not lose faith ”

Since: Jun 11

Location hidden

#308 Jan 27, 2013
cont.

Aramaic and Syriac are closer to Hebrew with the verb br’ meaning “to create.” The word is not used in the Aramaic portions of the Old Testament. In later Aramaic and Hebrew the Rabbinical usage carries the biblical meanings forward. Jastrow’s dictionary joins together under bara’(Heb.) and bera’(Aram.) The meanings “create, cut, shape, perforate,” and “strengthen, make well, make grow.” This simply represents the way that the literature used the word and expanded its range, and does not attempt to explain the connections of meanings and the roots.
Hebrew Derivative
There is only one noun to consider with this study, the feminine noun beri’ah,“a creation, thing created.” The only use of this word is in Numbers 16:30 where it describes something new and unparalleled:“If the LORD brings about something totally new”-- referring to the earth’s swallowing the rebels.
Conclusion
From this survey it seems safe to say that the Hebrew verb bara’,“to create,” is not well-attested in the cognate languages--but it does occur enough to show it is a good Semitic word. Only by allowing for a shift in the letters, or by joining apparent homonyms together as one root, can any substantial cognate material be collected to make a contribution. For example, Bernhardt suggests that the Hebrew root bara’ had an original meaning of “to separate, divide”(TDOT, II:245). This would account for definitions of “cut” as well as “create.” While this is certainly possible,(there is no real evidence for it.)[...]shape would also imply cut.

The verb is used in the basic (qal) stem some 38 times, and in the passive (niphal) stem ten times.

““You must not lose faith ”

Since: Jun 11

Location hidden

#309 Jan 27, 2013
Further reading:
http://individual.utoronto.ca/holmstedt/Holms...
http://individual.utoronto.ca/holmstedt/Holms...
http://ancienthebrewgrammar.wordpress.com/201...
http://ancienthebrewgrammar.wordpress.com/201...

1 a prepostion
2 a state
3 action following from 1 and 2

So verse 3 in genesis 1 is actually the first place anything happens as in finding the lightswitch.

““You must not lose faith ”

Since: Jun 11

Location hidden

#310 Jan 27, 2013
http://books.google.nl/books...

For understanding the form din idinu, and variants on resh-from or shyt-begin and b-bara:state stated:verdict in akkadian
Chiefly declared judges, finding the world a gloomy place: let there be light.

““You must not lose faith ”

Since: Jun 11

Location hidden

#311 Jan 27, 2013
1933 hava' haw-vaw' or havah {haw-vaw'}; a primitive root (Compare 183, 1961) supposed to mean properly, to breathe; to be (in the sense of existence):--be, X have.

1961 hayah haw-yaw a primitive root (Compare 1933); to exist, i.e. be or become, come to pass (always emphatic, and not a mere copula or auxiliary):--beacon, X altogether, be(-come), accomplished, committed, like), break, cause, come (to pass), do, faint, fall,+ follow, happen, X have, last, pertain, quit (one-)self, require, X use.

183 'avah aw-vaw' a primitive root; to wish for:--covet,(greatly) desire, be desirous, long, lust (after).

Add to that the options BARA, ASAH and KANE.
soovetti 24

Perth, UK

#312 Feb 9, 2013
Dude, just because you have a bit of information about some things does not make you smart to tell anyone that the information that we have is good enough for everyone. Dude, get a grip in life and study because I can see that you are led by a bunch of words that some people have inseminated in your skull, I'd be careful about the info that I get instead of calling mr ignorance and saying that this is good enough. Take care of your souls
soovetti 24

Perth, UK

#313 Feb 9, 2013
Gregory wrote:
<quoted text>
The Israelites forgot the name YHWH for Baal. Based on what authority do you state that the name YHWH is Babylonian? For your information, the word Baal is not even Babylonian, but Phoenician. Provide some evidence of your claim instead of just spouting off things you can't support. The name YHWH appears in every single copy of the Scriptures that we have, and that's good enough for me. It should be good enough for you as well.
Dude, just because you have a bit of information about some things does not make you smart to tell anyone that the information that we have is good enough for everyone. Dude, get a grip in life and study because I can see that you are led by a bunch of words that some people have inseminated in your skull, I'd be careful about the info that I get instead of calling mr ignorance and saying that this is good enough. Take care of your souls

““You must not lose faith ”

Since: Jun 11

Location hidden

#314 Feb 9, 2013
soovetti 24 wrote:
Dude, just because you have a bit of information about some things does not make you smart to tell anyone that the information that we have is good enough for everyone. Dude, get a grip in life and study because I can see that you are led by a bunch of words that some people have inseminated in your skull, I'd be careful about the info that I get instead of calling mr ignorance and saying that this is good enough. Take care of your souls
Well 'dude', i'm posting it here because it is new, and formerly unexplored. With a wordlist it would be more effective.
But i did not post for some blabber but to get some other reactions.
That won't stop me however from going on where i left of. Oneworld thus.
Spend two years here, read the links, get the wordlists and grammar of hebrew and surrounding languages and let's see if you have developed 'the good enoughs'.
Just veering away from the same old, same old.

Whatsup with supposing all people having souls and somesort of tool to take care of 'Ít'?

goodday.

Since: Feb 13

Location hidden

#315 Feb 22, 2013
The God of Israel was the first God and will be the last God. Baal is a generic name for any idol-also called devils. An idol is a physical representation of a dead god, earth is the land of the living, and the God of Israel will live on earth forever

Since: Feb 13

Location hidden

#316 Feb 26, 2013
Baal is e generic name for an idol. It is related to babel and Babylon which basically means "confusion" and "mystery" Christianity is the new Babylon and will be conquered and abolished by the Kingdom of God and the Messiah who Christians will call "the Antichrist" It is Christianity's mission to spread their pagan doctrine throughout the world. Christianity will not fully be defeated until the resurrection on the Mount of Olives.
The Lowest Room

Toronto, Canada

#317 Jul 1, 2013
abcd wrote:
YAHWEH IS BABYLONIAN PAGAN GOD USED 2 BE WORSHIPED LONG B4 THE TIME OF ISRAEL.
NOW MY QUESTION IS HOW THIS PAGAN BABYLONYAN GOD(NOT A UNIVARSAL GOD) CAME IN 2 THE BIBLE???
DOES IT NOT PROOFS BIBLE'S FORGERY AND CORRUPTION.????
I LIKE AN EXPLANATION ABT THIS PAGANIC GOD YAHWEH FRM THIS PAULINE PAGAN CHRISTIANITY.
IF U CANT EXPLAIN THAN I WANT CLEAR CUT ACCEPTANCE THAT BIBLE IS FORGED AND CORRUPTED.
DETAILS IS AS BELOW::
Friedrich Delitzsch brought into notice three tablets, of the age of the first dynasty of Babylon, in which he read the names of Ya- a'-ve-ilu, Ya-ve-ilu, and Ya-u-um-ilu ("Yahweh is God"), and which he regarded as conclusive proof that Yahweh was known in Babylonia before 2000 B.C.; he was a god of the Semitic invaders in the second wave of migration, who were, according to Winckler and Delitzsch, of North Semitic stock (Canaanites, in the linguistic sense).[56]
We should thus have in the tablets evidence of the worship of Yahweh among the Western Semites at a time long before the rise of Israel. The reading of the names is, however, extremely uncertain, not to say improbable, and the far-reaching inferences drawn from them carry no conviction.[57]
In a tablet attributed to the 14th century B.C. which Sellin found in the course of his excavations at Tell Ta'annuk (the city Taanach of the O.T.) a name occurs which may be read Ahi-Yawi (equivalent to Hebrew Ahijah);[58] if the reading be correct, this would show that Yahweh was worshipped in Central Palestine before the Israelite conquest. Genesis 14:17 describes a meeting between Melchizedek the king/priest of Salem and Abaraham. Both these pre-conquest figures are described as worshipping the same Most High God later identified as Yahweh.
The reading is, however, only one of several possibilities. The fact that the full form Yahweh appears, whereas in Hebrew proper names only the shorter Yahu and Yah occur, weighs somewhat against the interpretation, as it does against Delitzsch's reading of his tablets.
It would not be at all surprising if, in the great movements of populations and shifting of ascendancy which lie beyond our historical horizon, the worship of Yahweh should have been established in regions remote from those which it occupied in historical times; but nothing which we now know warrants the opinion that his worship was ever general among the Western Semites.
Many attempts have been made to trace the West Semitic Yahu back to Babylonia. Thus Delitzsch formerly derived the name from an Akkadian god, I or Ia; or from the Semitic nominative ending, Yau;[59] but this deity has since disappeared from the pantheon of Assyriologists. Bottero speculates that the West Semitic Yah/Ia, in fact is a version of the Babylonian God Ea (Enki), a view given support by the earliest finding of this name at Ebla during the reign of Ebrum, at which time the city was under Mesopotamian hegemony of Sargon of Akkad.
THE PAGAN ORIGIN OF YAHWEH IS SO EXPOSED THAT EVEN IN MODERN DAY BIBLE DO NOT USE THE WORD YAHWEH DESPITE MORE THAN 7000 TIMES THE NAME OCUURED IN THE BIBLE.
Many religions today do not use the name Jehovah as much as they did in the past. The original Hebrew name &#1497;&#1492;&#14 93;&#1492; appeared almost 7,000 times in the Old Testament, but is often replaced in popular Bibles (such as the King James Bible or New American Standard Bible) with all caps or small caps "LORD God" (for YHWH Elohim, Jehovah God), "Lord GOD" (for Adonai YHWH, Lord Jehovah), "LORD of hosts" (for YHWH Sabaoth, Jehovah of hosts), or just "LORD" (for single instances of YHWH, Jehovah)
You are 100% correct!. YHWH was a "MIDDIANITE/EDOMITE" God called "YAHOO"!!!. Moses father in law Jethro is the one who introduced YAHOO into the bible and YAHOO is from the babylonian epics. Nothing new or original about it, YHWH is a composite of previous canaanite deity.
human

Toronto, Canada

#318 Sep 9, 2013
It only means that some pagans in prehistory knew Yahweh!! It does not mean, its a forgery. Yahweh is a true god.

“No Allah: know peace”

Since: Jun 07

A sacred grove in Tujunga, CA

#319 Sep 10, 2013
human wrote:
It only means that some pagans in prehistory knew Yahweh!! It does not mean, its a forgery. Yahweh is a true god.
Hmm, so you are saying that the Bible lied when it said that Moses was the FIRST to worship the God of the Bible using the name YHVH?
Franklin Eugene Rhoads

Nashville, TN

#320 Sep 11, 2013
Liam R wrote:
<quoted text>
Hmm, so you are saying that the Bible lied when it said that Moses was the FIRST to worship the God of the Bible using the name YHVH?
The Scripture does not say 'Moses was the FIRST to worship the God of the Bible using the name YHVH ...'
The following was before Moshe:
Seth also had a son, and he named him Enosh. At that time people began to call on the Name of YHVH (Genesis 4:26).
What you are referring to is Exous 6:3. Note how the King James words this verse:
And I appeared unto Abraham, unto Isaac, and unto Jacob, by the name [title] of God Almighty [El Shaddai], but by my name JEHOVAH [YHVH] was I not known to them.
Note that it says "was I not known to them" and not I was not known to them. The way the King James is worded is as if it were asking a question rather than making a statment. In Hebrew there were no puncuation marks with in the text. The problem would be with the translators not understanding that it was a question and not adding the proper punctuation as a question mark instead of a period. Reading the ending of this verse as a question clears up any seeming contradiction in accordance with Genesis 4:26).

“No Allah: know peace”

Since: Jun 07

A sacred grove in Tujunga, CA

#321 Sep 11, 2013
Franklin Eugene Rhoads wrote:
<quoted text>
The Scripture does not say 'Moses was the FIRST to worship the God of the Bible using the name YHVH ...'
The following was before Moshe:
Seth also had a son, and he named him Enosh. At that time people began to call on the Name of YHVH (Genesis 4:26).
What you are referring to is Exous 6:3. Note how the King James words this verse:
And I appeared unto Abraham, unto Isaac, and unto Jacob, by the name [title] of God Almighty [El Shaddai], but by my name JEHOVAH [YHVH] was I not known to them.
Note that it says "was I not known to them" and not I was not known to them. The way the King James is worded is as if it were asking a question rather than making a statment. In Hebrew there were no puncuation marks with in the text. The problem would be with the translators not understanding that it was a question and not adding the proper punctuation as a question mark instead of a period. Reading the ending of this verse as a question clears up any seeming contradiction in accordance with Genesis 4:26).
“I appeared to Abraham, to Isaac, and to Jacob, as God Almighty, but by My name YHVH I was not known to them.(NKJV)

I appeared to Abraham, to Isaac, and to Jacob as El-Shaddai—‘God Almighty’—but I did not reveal my name, Yahweh, to them.(NLV)

And so on. There is more but I think that this is enough to show that this verse was written to show that Moses was the first to worship the God of the Bible using the name YHVH. Please do not even try to pretend that the KJV is in any way shape or form a reliable translation of the Hebrew.

“IAM4YHWH”

Since: May 08

Richmond, Indiana

#322 Sep 11, 2013
Liam R wrote:
<quoted text>
“I appeared to Abraham, to Isaac, and to Jacob, as God Almighty, but by My name YHVH I was not known to them.(NKJV)
I appeared to Abraham, to Isaac, and to Jacob as El-Shaddai—‘God Almighty’—but I did not reveal my name, Yahweh, to them.(NLV)
And so on. There is more but I think that this is enough to show that this verse was written to show that Moses was the first to worship the God of the Bible using the name YHVH. Please do not even try to pretend that the KJV is in any way shape or form a reliable translation of the Hebrew.
So, are you going to try and pretend that the NKJV and all of these other translations that word this verse in this manner are in any way shape or form a reliable translations of the Hebrew when they contradict what is said in Genesis 4:26? Don't even try it! LOL!
Genesis 4:26
New King James Version (NKJV)
And as for Seth, to him also a son was born; and he named him Enosh. THEN men BEGAN TO CALL on the name YHVH.

“No Allah: know peace”

Since: Jun 07

A sacred grove in Tujunga, CA

#323 Sep 12, 2013
Franklin Eugene Rhoads wrote:
<quoted text>
So, are you going to try and pretend that the NKJV and all of these other translations that word this verse in this manner are in any way shape or form a reliable translations of the Hebrew when they contradict what is said in Genesis 4:26? Don't even try it! LOL!
Genesis 4:26
New King James Version (NKJV)
And as for Seth, to him also a son was born; and he named him Enosh. THEN men BEGAN TO CALL on the name YHVH.
1) There is a contradiction in the Bible, thereby calling into question the reality of the claim that any part of the Bible was inspired by a God.

2) Moses wrote the entire Torah (including that part about after his own death) and Moses made a mistake when he said that anybody before him ever called the God of the Bible by the name YHVH. But this too is a contradiction, therefore see #1.

“IAM4YHWH”

Since: May 08

Richmond, Indiana

#324 Sep 14, 2013
Liam R wrote:
<quoted text>
1) There is a contradiction in the Bible, thereby calling into question the reality of the claim that any part of the Bible was inspired by a God.
2) Moses wrote the entire Torah (including that part about after his own death) and Moses made a mistake when he said that anybody before him ever called the God of the Bible by the name YHVH. But this too is a contradiction, therefore see #1.
No, I have never "[called] into question the reality of the claim that any part of the Bible was inspired by a God." I was giving reference to the manner in which it was translated In fact, I believe translating Exodus 6:3 as a question brings it into harmony with the rest of Scrtipture as a whole and in turn you have no contradiction.

No "Moses [DID NOT make] a mistake when he said that anybody before him ever called the God of the Bible by the name YHVH.", for the simply fact that Moshe did not say this at all. It was Father YHVH that is recorded as being quoted as speaking in Exodus 6:3, not Moshe.

And I appeared to Abraham, to Yitshaq, and to Ya'aqob, as El Shaddai. And by My Name, YHVH , was I not known to them?
Abdul Rahim Jr

Chicago, IL

#325 Oct 17, 2013
Ppl sound like they in denial about this pagan god no relics no language no pottery nothing smh sad

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Subscribe Now Add to my Tracker

Add your comments below

Characters left: 4000

Please note by submitting this form you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

Judaism Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
News Who Is Allah? (Aug '07) 3 min Bar Bahlul 220,402
codex sinaiticus - 1,600 yrs bible doesn't ment... (Feb '12) 1 hr MAAT 4,362
News Yiddish Sex Tips for Girls Find Home in Jerusal... May 24 Yiddishmanreceiver 1
News Obama says Israel should live up to its foundin... May 23 OId Sailor 2
Reformed/ Orthodox Purim Festiaval May 20 Eric 2
News The Believer In the Public Square May 18 rabbee yehoshooah... 5
News Islam and the 'Great Religions' May 17 MAAT 4
More from around the web