The following posts I made on Theology Forums shows my stance on Yeshua being Mashi'ahh. The posts are concerning a debate that I and a fellow Jew had on the issue. The debate went on from the below page, until about page 9.

http://www.theologyforums.com/forums/ShowPost.aspx?PageIndex=7&PostID=152436#152436

------------------
Eloah immakhem,

Shimson bar-Tzadoq

quote:

---

ANewman37 wrote:
Then there is the issue that I know could offend Shimson, but it may not apply to him, but it could be relevant nonetheless, that there is widespread acknowledgement out there, even in the Jewish Almanac, that 90% of those today who claim to be Jews, aren't even descended from the 12 Tribes of Israel?! That many are descended from the Khazars?! Now how would this affect all of these issues if this is true?!

Shimson throws around the phrase, "Take with a grain of salt" alot, well, if 90% of Jews are not even descendents of Jacob, and descend from the Khazarian empire around the turn of the last Millenium, then shouldn't we take much of Jewish culture and tradition and translation and interpretation with a grain of salt??????

---

Greetings ANewman37,

I pray you are well. I think you may want to recheck your facts about the Khazars. Lets take a look at the location of the Khazars. According to several sources Khazaria were located in Turkey.

http://www.khazaria.com/brook.html

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Khazars

The Khazars were a semi-nomadic Turkic people from Central Asia most of whom are reported to have converted to Judaism. They founded an independent Khaganate in the 7th century C.E. in the southeastern part of today's Europe, near the Caspian Sea and the Caucasus. In addition to western Kazakhstan, the Khazar kingdom also included territory in what is now eastern Ukraine, Azerbaijan, southern Russia, and Crimea. The name 'Khazar' itself seems to be tied to a Turkic verb meaning "wandering."

Originally, the Khazars practiced traditional Turkic shamanism, focused on the sky god Tengri, but were heavily influenced by Confucian ideas imported from China, notably that of the Mandate of Heaven. The Ashina clan were considered to be the chosen of Tengri and the kaghan was the incarnation of the favor the sky-god bestowed on the Turks. A kaghan who failed had clearly lost the god's favor and was typically ritually executed. Historians have sometimes wondered, only half in jest, if the Khazar tendency to occasionally execute their rulers on religious grounds led those rulers to seek out other religions.

The Khazars worshipped a number of deities subordinate to Tengri, including the fertility goddess Umay, Kuara, a thunder god, and Erlik, the god of death.

Jewish communities had existed in the Greek cities of the Black Sea coast since late classical times. Cherson, Sudak, and other Crimean cities boasted Jewish communities, and Samkarsh/Tmutarakan was said to have had a Jewish majority as early as the 670's. The original Jewish settlers were joined by waves of immigration fleeing persecution in the Byzantine Empire, Sassanid Persia, and later within the Islamic world. Jewish merchants such as the Radhanites regularly traded in Khazar territory, and may have wielded significant economic and political influence.

At some point in the last decades of the 8th century or the early 9th century, the Khazar royalty and nobility converted to Judaism, and part of the general population followed. Some researchers have suggested part of the reason for this mass conversion was political expediency to maintain a degree of neutrality: The Khazar empire was between growing populations; Muslims to the east and Christians to the west. Both religions recognized Judaism as a forebear and worthy of some respect. The exact date of the conversion is hotly contested. It may have occurred as early as 740 or as late as the mid 800's. Recently-discovered numismatic evidence suggests that Judaism was the established state religion by c. 830. Some medieval sources give the name of the rabbi who oversaw the conversion of the Khazars as Isaac Sangari or Yitzhak ha-Sangari.

The first Jewish Khazar king was named Bulan which means "elk", though some sources give him the Hebrew name Sabriel. A later king, Obadiah, strengthened Judaism, inviting rabbis into the kingdom and building synagogues. Jewish figures such as Saadia Gaon made positive references to the Khazars, and they are excoriated in contemporary Karaite writings as "bastards"; it is therefore unlikely that they adopted Karaism as some (such as Abraham Firkovitch) have proposed.

The Khazars enjoyed close relations with the Jews of the Levant and Persia. The Persian Jews, for example, hoped that the Khazars might succeed in conquering the Caliphate (Harkavy, in Kohut Memorial Volume, p. 244). The high esteem in which the Khazars were held among the Jews of the Orient may be seen in the application to them in an Arabic commentary on Isaiah ascribed by some to Saadia Gaon, and by others to Benjamin Nahawandi of Isaiah 48:14: "The Lord hath loved him." "This," says the commentary, "refers to the Khazars, who will go and destroy Bavel "i.e., Babylonia a name used to designate the country of the Arabs (Harkavy in "Ha-Maggid." 1877, p. 357).

Likewise, the Khazar rulers viewed themselves as the protectors of international Jewry. They were known to retaliate against Muslim or Christian interests in Khazaria for persecution of Jews abroad. Ibn Fadlan relates that around 920 the Khazar ruler received information that Muslims had destroyed a synagogue in the land of Babung, in Iran; he gave orders that the minaret of the mosque in his capital should be broken off, and the muezzin executed. He further declared that he would have destroyed all the mosques in the country had he not been afraid that the Muslims would in turn destroy all the synagogues in their lands.

What this means is that a large number of Ashkenazi Jews (Jews from Northern Europe, Russia, and the Ukraine) descend from a mix of Khazaria natives and Jews who made their way there. Besides anyone who converts to Judaism is considered a Jew, and has the same rights as any other Jew. This is just the same in Torah times when the Geir was treated exactly as a born Benei Yisrael. Besides the sons of Jacob married women from Canaan, and Egypt. There has never been such thing as a PURE line going back to Jacob. There is no law in the Torah against a Jew marrying a Geir. A Jew cannot marry a Geir Toshav, Nokhri, etc. unless that person becomes a Geir. Geirim learn Torah and Masorah in order for them to even become Geirim so your point here is kind of meaningless. The only way for someone to convert to Judaism is to learn how to be Jewish.

The majority of Jews come from lands like Syria, Egypt, Iraq, Yemen, India, Morocco, Nigeria, Ethiopia, etc. There were no Khazars in these lands, and in fact the Jews from lands have the oldest of Jewish ways, as scholars admit. There were no Khazars in the Middle East.

Yemenite Jews
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Yemenite_Jews

Local Yemenite Jewish traditions trace the earliest settlement of Jews in this region back to the time of King Solomon. Interestingly enough, the Chabashim (Jews in neighboring Ethiopia) have a sister legend of their origins that places the Queen of Sheba as married to King Solomon. The Sanaite Jews have a legend that their ancestors settled there forty-two years before the destruction of the First Temple in Jerusalem. It is said that under the prophet Jeremiah some 75,000 Jews, including priests and Levites, travelled to Yemen; when Ezra the scribe commanded the Jews to return to Jerusalem they disobeyed, whereupon he pronounced a ban upon them.

Mizrachi Jews
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mizrachi_Jews

Mizrachi Jews are Jews of Middle Eastern origin; that is to say, their ancestors never left the Middle East. In Israel, they are colloquially called Sephardic Jews, though technically the Mizrahim are not Sephardic, since they never lived in Sepharad (Spain and Portugal) nor are they descended of those who were expelled from the Iberian peninsula during the Spanish Inquisition.

Arab Jews, a phrase that is rarely used today, was once also the common designation for the Mizrahim. The most prominent language associated with the Mizrahim are the various Judæo-Arabic dialects, though other languages may also be associated with them, as in the case of Judeo-Persian for the Mizrahim original to Iran. See also Mizrahi Hebrew language.

In reaction to the events leading up to and following the 1948 Arab-Israeli War, citizens of Arab countries acted violently against their local Jewish populations in what they viewed as retaliation for both the creation of the Jewish state of Israel, and for their brethren being turned into refugees as a result. Further anti-Jewish actions by Arab governments in the 1950s and 1960s, incuding the expulsion of 25,000 Mizrahi Jews from Egypt following the 1956 Suez Crisis, led to the overwhelming majority of Mizrahim becoming refugees. Most of these refugees fled to Israel.

Today, of the few remaining Mizrahi communities still residing in Arab countries, with a combined population of fewer than 1,000 individuals, a trickle of emigration to Israel continues and is encouraged by the Jewish state.

Sephardic Jews
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sephardic_Jews#History

Although the Sephardim lived on peaceful terms with other Jews, they rarely intermarried with them; neither did they unite with them in forming congregations, but adhered to their own ritual, which differed widely from the Ashkenazic. Paradoxically, those who had suffered the racial pride of limpieza de sangre (clean bloodline) applied a similar concept toward other Jews. Wherever the Sephardic Jews settled they grouped themselves according to the country or district from which they had come, and organized separate communities with legally enacted statutes. In Constantinople and Thessaloniki, for example, there were not only Castilian, Aragonian, Catalonian, and Portuguese congregations, but also Toledo, Cordova, Evora, and Lisbon congregations, and differenced themselves from Romaniotes. In Morocco, Sephardim considered themselves superior to Berber Jews. Under the common pressure of the Islamic society, the Berbers tried to merge with the Sephardim by naming their children with Sephardic names.

One interesting example is the "Belmonte Jews" in Portugal. A whole community survived in secrecy for hundreds of years by maintaining a tradition of intermarriage and by hiding all the external signs of their faith. The Jewish comunity in Belmonte goes back to the 12th Century and they were only discovered in the 20th Century. Their rich Sephardic tradition of Crypto-Judaism is unique. Only recently did they contact other Jews and they now profess Orthodox Judaism, although they still retain their centuries-old traditions.

The term Sephardi can also describe the nusach (Hebrew language, "liturgical tradition") used by Sephardi Jews in their Siddur (prayer book). A nusach is defined by a liturgical tradition's choice of prayers, order of prayers, text of prayers and melodies used in the singing of prayers. This is to be distinguished by the "Nusach Sepharad" used by Chassidic Jews.

This phrase is frequently used in contrast with Ashkenazi Jews, also called Ashkenazim, who are descendants of Jews from Germany, Poland, Austria and Eastern-Europe.

Ethiopian Jews
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ethiopian_Jews#Origins

Ethiopian legend relates that Ethiopians are descendants of Israelite tribes who came to Ethiopia with Menelik I, alleged to be the son of King Solomon and the Queen of Sheba (or Makida, in the legend). The legend relates that Menelik, as an adult, returned to his father in Jerusalem, and then resettled in Ethiopia. In the Bible there is no mention that the Queen of Sheba either married or had any sexual relations with King Solomon; rather, the narrative records that she was impressed with his wealth and wisdom, and they exchanged royal gifts, and then she returned to rule her people in "Kush". However, the "royal gifts" are interpreted by some as sexual contact.

However, the Beta Israel generally consider this legend to be a fabrication. Instead they believe, based on the 9th century stories of Eldad ha-Dani (the Danite), that the tribe of Dan attempted to avoid the civil war in the Kingdom of Israel between Solomon's son Rehoboam and Jeroboam the son of Nebat, by resettling in Egypt. From there they moved southwards up the Nile into Ethiopia, and the Ethiopian Jews are descended from these Danites.

------------------
Eloah immakhem,

Shimson bar-Tzadoq

quote:

---

ANewman37 wrote:
Lets look at the Septuagint. Look what Jews did to that translation. So its not like Jews should be totally free from suspicion?

---

Greetings,

If memory serves there were a total of 70 Soferim (scribes) that worked on the LXX. This of course does not constitute even a 1% ratio of the scribes that lived during that time. There were even some Soferim during that time who did not like the idea of translating the Tanakh into Greek. I never said that any Jew should not be under suspicion. Besides ALL translations have roots from Jewish texts, so if Jews should be under suspicion so should your translations. Besides all you have to do is compare the Jewish Torah with the Samaritan Torah, if the Jewish text is under suspicion. There are three Jewish texts you can compare so I don't think there is much of a problem in that arena.

------------------
Eloah immakhem,

quote:

---

ANewman37 wrote:
#6 - In relation to question #5, you seem to speak of Jews as being separate from Gentiles? But from my understanding of the Messianic writings(BC/NT) as I'll refer to them from here on out, the Gentiles are grafted into Israel. What? Probably the first 100,000 believers in the Resurrected Messiah were Jewish, so the Messianic Faith was never supposed to be a separate entity. Shaul states that believers are to be the Priesthood of Believers, the same concept that you claim for Jews, that you are to be a Nation of Priests. The early Gentile believers were told only to hold to a minimum of rules, but what else were they told? To go back and attend synagogue basically, to continue learning Torah. They were supposed to become apart of Israel. You seem to speak as if there are different standards for Jew and Gentile? Different rules, differenent laws, different instructions? Where in the scriptures can you back this up?!
The SAME TORAH LAWS applied to the foreigner, stranger, sojourner in the land, did they not?

---

Greetings,

If you go back and look in the Torah as I pointed out earlier, that non-Jews LIVING amongst Jews fall into several different categories Geirim, Geir Toshav, Ben-Nokhri, etc. These types of non-Jews all had different rules applied to them. Geirim were the same as a Benei Yisrael in terms of the things they did. A Geir Toshav was someone who was not allowed to eat the Pesahh Qorban (Passover offereing) and was allowed to eat Nevilah, where the Benei Yisrael and the Geir could not eat Nevilah. My earlier post already covers this issue.

If you go back and look at my words you will notice that I made a distinction between a non-Jew who lived amongst Jews (Geir Toshav), and non-Jews who did not. The fact that there were non-Jews going to the Synagogoues means that they were Geir Toshav. Any non-Jew who had made the decision to live EXACTLY as a Jew was a Geir. Big difference.

Besides any Rabbi will tell you that even a Noakhide studies Torah. The only way for a Noakhide to even know what the applicable commandments for him/her to perform would be to study the Torah. In order to understand this you would need to visit a Synagogoue to see it. Any non-Jew is welcome into a Synagogoue in theory as long as he/she is at least a Geir Toshav. If that Geir Toshav decides to live as a Jew he/she would approach a Rabbi and the Rabbi would take them before a Beith Din and make them a Geir, which would mean they were a Jew.
I am not the one speaking as if there is a difference between Jews/Geirim and Geir Toshav, Noakhides, and such the Torah makes that distinction. The same Torah has commandments for all humanity, but it is not the same for everyone. That is like claiming that a regular Benei Yisrael can up and decide to do the thigns that ONLY the Kohanim or the Levites were commanded to do. This is not the case at all.

Besides as I mentioned before a non-Geir can make their own decisions on how they follow Torah. We as Jews have what Yeshayahu 8:20 mentions both Torah and Te'udah (custom, testimony) involved in all our decisions. That along with what Acts 21:18-24 mentions about Torah, circumsion of sons, and Minhagei Torah (traditions, customs of Torah) that we MUST remain in. This according to the Jerusalem Council.

------------------
Eloah immakhem,

quote:

---

ANewman37 wrote:
Examples, Yahweh and Yahueh. How are these renderings different? They are not, they are identical in that both the "w" & the "u" are simply english letters that represent the same sound. Its true that different renderings can mislead and CAN be pronounced differently, but only when those doing the pronouncing are not yet aware of all of the relevant information.

---

Greetings

I pray you are well. I will have to disagree with you on this for a couple of reasons. First of all, "u" and "w" don't have the same sound in English. That is like saying that University and Wniversity are the same. They are not. Second, in Hebrew (which is the language in question here) Waw and Shuruq Waw are not the same sound. Yahweh is a completely different verb than Yahueh. In Hebrew because of the fact they are different verb tenses of Hey-Waw-Hey they don't have the same sound. Besides, the correct English transliteration of Yahueh is Yahuweh. We know this because this form is Yahuweh is a Pual, 3rd person, masculine of Hey-Waw-Hey. The Waw in this form is a consonant, and the Hey has a Qibutz under it. Because of this spelling this form as "Yahueh" is really not correct because the Waw consonant is being left out leaving out the "weh" in turn for a "eh." Any English teacher can tell you these two pronunciation are not the same. This means that Yahuweh is 3 syllables, where Yahweh is two. This is because Yahweh is Yod (Pathahh) - Hey - Waw (Seghol) - Hey. Yah-weh as compared to Ya-hu-weh are not the same. I know that there are people who try to claim they are, but the people who claim this don't know Hebrew. Anyone who knows Hebrew knows they are not the same. English and Hebrew are not the same language, so trying to compare them in this way is incorrect and it comes of as trying to strecth something into it in any way possible. You don't have to trust me or believe me on this, all you have to do is learn even a small amount of Hebrew and this becomes evident.

------------------
Eloah immakhem,

quote:

---

ANewman37 wrote:
I sometimes get the impression that Jews don't want Gentiles to start being Torah Observant, because they may sense that the Gentiles just might make them look bad, or that the Jews will lose their "Chosen people" status if Gentiles become like them? I've been told by Jews that the food laws were not for Gentiles?! Hello?! Did that Jew want me to eat unclean meats and get sick?! Jews may not want Gentiles proclaiming the Sacred Name either, for the same reasons, it may make them look bad, that here the Gentiles praise and proclaim the Name of the Father, but the Jews don't?!

---

Greetings,

I pray you are well. I have yet to meet any Jew who makes it his/her peragotive to out and force non-Jews to not live by Torah. Besides in a Jewish community being Torah observant is different from anything I have seen any non-Jewish group come up with. I for example have yet to see any non-Jewish group start studying Halakhah and Minhag and making rulings based on it, EXACTLY like a Jew would which is what Torah observance means in the Jewish community. If you have never heard of these terms, trust me you are not performing Torah the way that Jews do.

Jews are not concerned about loosing a "chosen people status" as you mention it. I have yet to meet a Jew who was concerned with this because a non-Jew desires to live by Torah. There are many Jews who are puzzled why a non-Jew would want to "JOIN" the Jewish community (Geirut), but in terms of non-Jews off somewhere doing what they feel is right, I PERSONALLy haven't met any Jews concerned about that. Besides as I mentioned before a non-Jew can make a choice in this matter and can do it any way they desire. I don't see any Jews stopping you from doing what you are doing. Not all Jews agree on the issue to begin with so it is kind of mute.

As I mentioned before the Sacred Name movement can do anything it wants in this arena. I don't know of any group of Jews out opposing the SN Movment. Most Jews have never even heard of the SN Movement.

If you are a Geir Toshav according to the Torah you can eat nevilah, if you are a full Geir then you cannot. Maybe, the reason why someone told you can eat non-Kosher food is because the Jewish definition of Kosher goes beyond just what the Torah says. Glatt Kosher has a seperate group of rules on it. Besides, I highly doubt that the Jews you mentioned are actually that concernded about how you eat. They obviously didn't make effort to stop you, and the majority of Jews are not that concerned about that anyway. It is not like there is some Jewish goon squad out trying to force non-Jews not to live by Torah.

Besides at the most a non-Jew living above the level of a Geir Toshav is a Geir Tzedeq and historically, most Jews don't have problems with Geir Tzedeq.

Further information on this as it concerns non-Jews joined to Jewish communities can be found on this site.

http://www.chayas.com/ger.htm

As a side note the rules of Kashruth in Jewish thought for the most part has nothing to do with health. There are some animals that the Torah calls non-Kosher, which are not unhealthy to eat. A Jew who keeps Kosher mainly does it simply because Elohim commanded us to do it.

------------------
Eloah immakhem,

Shimson bar-Tzadoq

quote:

---

ANewman37 wrote:
Your reference of HalleluYAH being Halleluyoh, to me seems like another attempt by Jews to HIDE the Name of the Creator, like they did with all of the Yah & Yahu beginnings of hebrew names. This is an acknowledged fact that the Jews did this. I honestly would be kind of suprised if you denied this FACT. But then again, you seem to be full of surprises, I've found in my time in here, so I won't be THAT surprised if you deny this, or have some sort of excuse/explanation to explain away this practice.

---

Greetings ANewman37,

I pray you are well. You can believe what you desire on this. I am not trying to convince you or anyone of anything. I provided sources for the information I presented so you can really take that information any way that you desire. Refute the sources, and prove to me that the Qametz Hatuf is pronounced EXACTLY the same as a Pathahh. That is what your claim seems to be.

I don't have any need to hide anything from anyone, which is why I am always more than willing to give anyone ALL of the theories and then let them research it from there. You don't have to trust any Jew on this, NO ONE is asking you to trust a Jew and there is no command for you to do things Jews do in terms of Minhagei Torah mentioned in Acts 21:18-24. Jews have VARIOUS opinions on this, and other things so there is no UNIVERSAL opinion as seem to claim. Besides ANY PERSON who reads a Jewish Torah text with commentary can find that many of them list all the possibilities of the pronounciation. I know of SEVERAL Torah texts where the commentaries give ALL the possibilities, so nothing is being hidden in the Jewish community. Anyone who learns Hebrew can also find all of the possibilities. If anything I think you need to put blame on those who taught you as a child, instead of us. If you read a Christian bible as a kid that didn't teach you about these matters your blame should be one the people who produced the bible you read from.

In terms of the "supposed" change in Yah and Yahu in names, I find your assumption here laughable, since IF you had looked into what I presented about the OLDER dialects of Hebrew you would know better. The dialect shift created Yeho and Yah. If you researched what I gave earlier about the various ANCIENT dialects of Hebrew you would see that your point is a mute one. Besides Strong's puts it that way, and anyone who knows that a vocal Sheva in ancient times was not pronounced as "e" would know the deal on this. You also mention that we as Jews have been hiding this information, as if we have been hiding it from you, yet you claim that most Jews say Yod-Hey-Waw-Hey is pronounced Yahweh. Which one is it? Are we hiding it or are we claiming it to be Yahweh.

As I mentioned before you and any other Sacred Namer can do anything you want in this area. No one is trying to stop you from believing anything or doing anything.

In terms of your statement on the VARIOUS spellings used with the Sacred Name Movement, the following are a list of just a few places. The following are the locations and some of the groups or people who make the claims I mention. All of these are Sacred Name groups and are not anti-Sacred Name, and these only represent a few of them.

1) Yahweh
You are already know where this comes from.

2) Yahwi
http://www.threeq.com/pages/namebook.html

3) Yahuwah
http://www.considerthis.net
http://www.bibletruth.cc/the_sacred_name.htm

4) Yahwah
http://www.yhwh124.com/
http://www.israelite.net/

5) Gehevah
One of the members of this site says that this is the actual pronunciation.

6) Yahveh
http://www.yahveh.com/
http://www.yhvh.com/home.asp

7) Yahuweh
http://www.waytruthlife.com/actsfellowship/index2.htm

8) Yahueh
http://members.nuvox.net/~on.roz/God/name/above.html

9) Yehowah
http://www.divinename.net/

10) ee-ah-oo-eh or ee-ah-oo-ah
http://www.yahsheua.com/

11) Yahowah
http://www.theassemblyofyahowahtheeternal.com/home.html

An arguement can be made that people who don't acknowledge any of the other possibilities are the ones HIDING the information. That is to say promoting one thing, while acting like the others aren't valid. I have shown every one of them and presented the flaws in each one. You can't more non-partisan than that.

------------------
Eloah immakhem,

quote:

---

Originally posted by shofarshogood:
Thank you, Brother Shimson. I appreciate you sharing your experience and insight with myself and the others.

I am awaiting delivery of Page H. Kelley's Biblical Hebrew Grammar, so I am taking the first steps to seriously pursuing an understanding of Biblical Hebrew. I also have "Teach Yourself Biblical Hebrew", by R.K. Harrison. From the customer feedback on Amazon, these two books seem to be highly recommended as primary grammars. I also have Kelley's Masorah of the BHS, for future reference; when I am ready to study at a more advanced level. On that subject, are there any advanced grammars you would recommend for future reference ?

I'm looking forward to the journey, Brother, and I too encourage others to learn Biblical Hebrew. I believe the reward for diligently studying Biblical Hebrew will, one day, produce a bountiful harvest.

Shalom aleikhem, and may HoSHeiM bless you.

---

Greetings shofarsgood,

I pray you are well. Good to hear about your walk into learning as much Hebrew as you can. You will find it to be a blessing to begin to read the text for yourself. You will also want to get a Lexicon.

In terms of advanced grammers I would recommend. I don't know of any that I could give you right now. Once you get the basics down, and then work on learning vocabulary the use of commentaries ends up helping in that area. Most Biblical Hebrew grammers cover all the grammer you will need to be able to read so I don't think you will have a problem there. The Eisenbraus web-site at https://www.eisenbrauns.com/ can help with anything you would be lacking.

------------------
Eloah immakhem,

Shimson bar-Tzadoq

Webster's New Word Dictionary notes (and not quoting exact because don't have fonts): The 23rd letter of the English alphabet: its sound was represented in Anglo-Saxon manuscripts by uu or u until 900 A.D., then by (wen) borrowed from the runic alphabet, sometimes by wu, v, wo, vo, uo or o. In the 11th century a ligatured VV or vv (two Vs) was introduced by Norman scribes to replace the wen. The sound of W or w: in English, it is a lip-rounded tongue-back semivowel like a quickly cutoff oo at the beginning of words; concluding a diphthong it is a u-glide. Before r, as in wrist, and in some words, answer, sword, two, it is silent.

I also believe that someone posting a bunch of Web sites where different people have a different understanding of the transliteration doesn't prove a thing. The pronunciation is out there and attainable if anyone chooses to search. However, I do feel that those people are probably doing the best that they can to gain understanding, and one thing is, we will never stop learning. If they continue their search, they will not stop learning either.

As Yahushua the messiah states in Luke 11:9: And I say unto you, Ask, and it shall be given you; seek, and ye shall find; knock, and it shall be opened unto you.

In other words, Yahushua the messiah promised that to those to ask, seek, knock, they'll find the answers. It's an absolute promise!

Next, in our process of asking and seeking, we have plenty of witnesses in ancient languages to show us how to achieve the pronunciation, including but not limited to, the ANCIENT Samaritans, whose writings give us the sound Yah-oo-ey, just like the Yah-u-eh or Yah-w-eh. Yes, some confusion does still exist because of the misunderstanding of the "b" sound. But that sound incorrect. Read Chapter IX of the book entitled "The Sacred Name Yahweh," from yahweh.org .

Finally, I wish to thank ANewman and Larry Acheson for their post about the sacred name Yahweh. Those were extremely good, and I enjoyed them very much.

quote:

---

ANewman37 wrote:
Doesn't even the Talmud tell a story that seems to try to explain away Messiah's miracles by claiming that he stole the pronounciation of the Sacred Name from the Holiest of Holies by writing it down on a paper and then sticking it into a wound he inflicted upon himself, under the skin, so that when he left the Holy of Holies and forgot the pronounciation, as was the belief of those who wrote this story, that he'd look in his wound and find the paper and then remember how to say the Sacred Name. This is how they claimed he performed his miracles, implying that they one, could not deny that miracles occurred that they could not explain away, and two, that he obviously pronounced and used the Sacred Name of the Father. The textual evidence seems to suggest just the same thing.

---

Greetings ANewman37,

The Talmud does not mention any such story. What you are talking about is the Toldot Yeshu, which is a text from the middle ages. The tradition presented here is most commonly dated to approximately the 6th century CE. The text it self is closer to the 14th c. There is no scholarly consensus on to what extent the text might be a direct parody of a now lost gospel. H.J. Schonfield argued that it was so closely connected to the Gospel of the Hebrews that he attempted to reconstruct that lost work from the Toledoth.

The following web-site deals with the issue of whether Yeshua is ever addressed in the Talmud.
http://www.angelfire.com/mt/talmud/jesusnarr.html

------------------
Eloah immakhem,

quote:

---

ANewman37 wrote:
This seems to me to be something that Jews like to ignore when considering this issue, especially in reference to the Messiah's Name. Strongs Concordance shows it to have originally been Yahushua, or Yehoshua if you go with the Jewish human traditional practices, but I hardly believe that the Angel accomodated for human traditions when telling the Messiahs parents what to name their child. Calling him Yeshua strips the Father's name from the Messiah's name. Can that possibly be seen as an acceptable practice?! Not in my opinion. Yahushua never seemed to accomodate his teachings or actions to human traditions, why would his Father in heaven do so, or the Angel he sent to tell Yahushua's parents what to name him?

---

Greetings ANewman37,

This is also not true. Strong's shows that the name of Joshua son of Nun was spelled Yehoshua. Besides this is not a Jewish tradition, this is a dialect shift, where if you paid attention to the other posts that I have dealt with this you would know that this is not how it was pronounced in ancient times anyway. You may want to go back and re-read what I posted on the dialect changes in the Hebrew language. You will find that your accusation in this area is incorrect since it is a known fact that during the time of Mosheh that the name Yod-Hey-Waw-Shin-Ayin was pronounced as either Yahung-shu`a (the Ayin being pronounced, and stress on the Shin) or Yusho'a (Samaritan).

In terms of stripping his name from one thing to another. All of the texts (Aramaic, Hebrew, and otherwise) from the time period (pre-4th cent.) have Yeshua in them. I know of only one text that has Yod-Hey-Waw-Shin-Ayin, and it is a defective text from a later period. Besides there are again VARIOUS Sacred Name opinions on this also. The oldest NT texts have Yod-Shin-Waw-Ayin. Once again you can believe what ever you want on this. The Sacred Name understanding of these things is something that you have the freedom to accept. This has nothing to do with anyone's tradition, this has to do with EVIDENCE. What evidence do you have the DuTillet and the Aramaic and Syriac were changed in this regard?

As I mentioned before I read from the Aramaic texts from the 4th to 5th cent. so we should be able to agree to disagree on this since we are reading from completely different texts from different time periods.

------------------
Eloah immakhem,

Whenever the Eternal Name is pronounced in different languages,

then the transliteration of the vocalization of three vowels phonemes would have to be addapted according to the natural tendencies intrinsic in each distinct language,

because the A E I O U has a distinct phoneme to each language and nation.

5) Gehevah

One of the members of this site wrote that this is the pronunciation,

but I have been calling upon the Eternal Name pronouncing Gehaveh,

because of the three consonant phonemes: G/e H/a V/e H = Ge'Ha'Veh.

Shalom/Permanence of Yahweh/Gehaveh

with you all,

Greetings in the name of YHWH through His Son Yeshua the Messiah.

Back on 02-21-2005 at 05:14 PM you wrote the following with regard to the Israelite name Hashem (I Chron. 11:34):

quote:

---

On the issue of the person mentioned in 1 Divrei Yamim 11:34 when one looks at the Hebrew texts one finds that this person's name was spelled Hey (Qamatz)-Shin (Tzere)-Mem pronounced Hoshem and is from an UNKNOWN root, but believed by most scholars to be from the shoresh (Shin-Mem-Mem) or (Shin-Waw-Mem) and Hoshem means "fat." (Analytical Hebrew and Chaldee Lexicon, page CCXXVI) and (Etymological Dictionary of Biblical Hebrew by Matityahu Clark, page 264). I will further add that Hey (Qametz) - Shin (Tzere) - Mem is one word, where Hey (Pathah) - Shin (Tzere) - Mem is a Shin (Tzere) - Mem with the definate article Hey (Pathahh). Any school child knows that a definate article Hey with a Qametz happens when the initial consonant of the word is a Guttaral.

---

I reply: I know I have already replied to the above commentary once, but I believe you misunderstood my response. I have since sent an inquiry to a Jewish rabbi in an effort to see if he might validate the information you offered. He did not do so, I'm afraid.

First, though, regarding your use of The Analytical Hebrew and Chaldee Lexicon, page CCXXVI, I see nothing on that page validating either your claim that the word spelled "he-shiyn-mem" means "fat" or that it should be pronounced "hoshem." In fact, the word "fat" does not appear anywhere on that page. Furthermore, the vowel-pointing offered on that page is the same as that offered in Strong's. I know that I was able to locate the proper Hebrew word because the listing identified this word as a masculine proper noun used in I Chron. 11:34. It definitely has a "qâmêts" under the "he," just as Strong's does. Of course, I realize that the "qâmêts" and the "short qâmêts," which apparently conveys that "o" sound, are very similar in appearance, so I can see how easy it would be to confuse the one for the other. It appears, though, that both Strong's and The Analytical Hebrew and Chaldee Lexicon agree, at least with regard to how the first syllable of that name is vowel-pointed.

I can certainly understand how and why a Jewish person would be biased towards wanting to vowel-point the name Hashem so as to pronounce it differently than the common expression used as a substitute for the Tetragrammaton (HaShem), for it really does not seem fitting to me that we should desire to refer to the Almighty with a word pronounced identically to the name already reserved for a man. To me it is dishonorable, but I realize that what is dishonorable to one is not to another. I believe this is where we need to be careful about "just accepting" traditions handed down to us. If I had "just accepted" the traditions handed down by my parents, I would still be worshipping on Sunday and observing Christmas. I would also be referring to the Almighty as "LORD God." It wasn't by any means easy giving up those traditions, but I am glad I did. I believe all of us need to be willing and prepared to sacrifice traditions for the sake of truth.

Since I obviously don't know Hebrew all that well, I fully understand that anything I say will be taken with "a grain of salt," and that is fine, for I am not about to tell you or anyone what you must do to please the Father. I am only striving to do what I believe is pleasing in view of the information available to me. However, sometimes when these matters arise, I am compelled to inquire of the Hebrew experts to see what they have to say. Certainly a Jewish rabbi would be more apt than most people to find any justification for pronouncing the Israelite man's name as "Hoshem," since it is so obvious that the alternative is to settle for a pronunciation that matches the common appellative employed by mainstream Judaism. In spite of whatever biases that Rabbi Shraga Simmons may have, he nevertheless affirms that the "most accurate pronunciation" of this Hebrew name is "Haw-shem."

I visited a Jewish website where people are invited to ask the rabbis questions. This particular website can be accessed at the following URL: http://jewish.com/page.php?do=page&cat_id=1109

This website gives anyone with questions several different options from different categories as they select which rabbi will answer his or her question. The option I selected was for an orthodox rabbi to answer a question from the following category:

Rabbinic era (14)
Beginning with the end of the Persian rule of the land of Israel, and the start of Hellenistic rule of the Middle East under Alexander the Great (approx. 333 B.C.E.) ending with the conquest of the land of Israel to Islam in 648 C.E. This period includes the writing of the Mishnah, Gemara, and major works of Midrash.

As I indicated earlier, it was Rabbi Shraga Simmons who responded to my inquiry. Here is the question I submitted to the website:

Hello, Could you please share what you believe to be the most accurate pronunciation of the Israelite whose name is only mentioned in I Chronicles 11:34 and traditionally rendered "Hashem"? I was recently informed that, with the more ancient vowel pointings, that name was not actually pronounced "Hashem," but I do not have access to his resources to check out his claim. He told me that it was more accurately pronounced "Hoshem." I would appreciate any assistance you can offer. Sincerely, Larry

Here is the response I received:

Thank you for writing and sharing your thoughts. The most accurate pronunciation would be Haw-shem. I hope this has been helpful. With blessings for success, Rabbi Shraga Simmons aish.com

My reaction: I don't believe this Jewish rabbi has any reason to want to justify the pronunciation Haw-shem, yet he plainly recognizes it as the "most accurate pronunciation." I see no reason to believe that the vowel-pointings for that Hebrew name would have been changed so as to match the common appellative reserved for the Almighty by Judaism. Such a "change" would not have been helpful to their cause. Instead, it would have been more helpful for them to have done the opposite, changing the vowel-pointing in that name so as to be pronounced as an "o." The fact that they did not do this persuades me that, indeed, Rabbi Shraga Simmons is correct in his assessment.

I realize you and I approach our worship of the Almighty from vastly different perspectives. As a completely independent student of the Word who has no ax to grind, no following to impress, no unscriptural traditions to hold on to, I simply do not follow the reasoning behind preferring Hashem. Even if I were to be completely mistaken in how I pronounce the Almighty's name, He alone knows my heart and my desire to use His name in a manner that brings Him honor. And if the pronunciation is wrong, I am thankful to serve a loving and merciful Heavenly Father.

Rather than concern myself with the traditions of modern-day folk, my family and I opt for the traditions of the ancients, who freely spoke the Name. According to Everyman's Talmud by A. Cohen, p.24:

    To the Oriental, a name is not merely a label as with us. It was thought of as indicating the nature of the person or object by whom it was borne. For that reason special reverence attached to 'the distinctive Name' (Shem Hamephorash) of the Deity which He had revealed to the people of Israel, viz. the tetragrammaton, JHVH.
    In the Biblical period there seems to have been no scruple against its use in daily speech. The addition of Jah or Jahu to personal names, which persisted among the Jews even after the Babylonian exile, is an indication that there was no prohibition against the employment of the four-lettered Name.

On page 25, Cohen offers additional insight that seems to conflict with today's modern Jewish perspective:

On the other hand, there was a time when the free and open use of the Name even by the layman was advocated. The Mishnah teaches: 'It was ordained that a man should greet his friends by mentioning the Name' (Ber. IX.5). It has been suggested that the recommendation was based on the desire to distinguish the Israelite from the Samaritan, who referred to God as 'the Name' and not as JHVH, or the Rabbinite Jew from the Jewish-Christian.

It seems that the "Jewish perspective" regarding mentioning the Tetragrammaton depends upon which Jew you ask. I believe the 6,823 + appearances of the Tetragrammaton in Scripture speaks loudly in support of calling upon that name and mentioning it to others, so I am inclined to accept Cohen's remark about laymen freely speaking the Name. I know Abraham did (Gen. 12:8) and I believe Yeshua did, too. At least He said He did (John 17:6, 26), and I believe Him. Everyone else out there can choose to refer to the Almighty however they choose, so far as I'm concerned, but as for me and my house we will continue to call upon YHWH.

As you mentioned both the Lexicon and Strong's have Qametz under the Hey. I never disputed this, but as I mentioned earlier Qametz, Qametz Hatuf, and Patahh are not the same pronunciation and anyone who knows Hebrew knows this. The Rabbi you asked even verified this. Next time you email him ask him what is the difference between Qametz and Pathahh in Biblical Hebrew, and as I mentioned earlier ask him about the specifically Yemenite pronounciation of Hebrew, which most scholars consider to be the most ancient dialect of Hebrew.

As I mentioned before Hey (Qametz) - Shem (Tzere) - Mem and Hey (Pathahh) - Shin (Tzere) - Mem are not the same. Even your Strong's and the Rabbi you asked confirmed this.

Jewish Encyclopedia
http://www.jewishencyclopedia.com/view.jsp?artid=549&letter=P&search=Babylonia

This would tend to support the theory of a Palestinian origin for the Sephardic pronunciation. But against it are the following considerations: The analogy of the Syriac would indicate that the "Kamez" was pronounced ā in Babylonia and ô in Palestine. There is no proof that the Babylonians in early times pronounced the "Kamez" like ô. The o sound of that vowel was known even to Philo of Alexandria (Siegfried, in "Merx's Archiv," vol. i.), and, according to Abraham ibn Ezra ("Zahot," p. 3b), was the prevalent one in Tiberias and North Africa in later times. Two of the systems of vocalization which have been handed down had, according to tradition, their origin in Palestine, and agree with the traditional Babylonian system of vocalization in representing "Kamez" as o.

Also, the following web-site offers further information about the word Hey (Qametz) - Shin (Tzere) - Mem, and it gives the meaning that I mentioned earlier.

http://bible1.crosswalk.com/Lexicons/Hebrew/heb.cgi?number=02044&version=kjv

I will restate what I posted.

Shimson stated earlier
In the Introduction Hebrew Dictionary page v. Strong's mentions that Qametz and Pathahh don't have the same sound. Thus Strong's agrees that there is no way that a Hey with (Qametz) could be confused with a Hey with (Pathahh). As I stated earlier.

On the issue of the person mentioned in 1 Divrei Yamim 11:34 when one looks at the Hebrew texts one finds that this person's name was spelled Hey (Qamatz)-Shin (Tzere)-Mem pronounced Hoshem and is from an UNKNOWN root, but believed by most scholars to be from the shoresh (Shin-Mem-Mem) or (Shin-Waw-Mem) and Hoshem means "fat." (Analytical Hebrew and Chaldee Lexicon, page CCXXVI) and (Etymological Dictionary of Biblical Hebrew by Matityahu Clark, page 264). I will further add that Hey (Qametz) - Shin (Tzere) - Mem is one word, where Hey (Pathah) - Shin (Tzere) - Mem is a Shin (Tzere) - Mem with the definate article Hey (Pathahh). Any school child knows that a definate article Hey with a Qametz happens when the initial consonant of the word is a Guttaral.

Pathahh is NEVER written as "AW" in these same texts to make the distinction between how it pronounced in the later Hebrew sectors.

As mentioned before most Hebrew scholars agree that the Yemenite pronounciation of Hebrew is considered to be one of the oldest dialects of Hebrew (Morag, Shlomo--Pronunciation of Hebrew, Encyclopedia Judaica, Keter Jerusalem 1971, Vol 13. Col 1122-24). That is along with the Samaritans. As I have shown that Qamatz and Pathahh are not pronounced the same thus them neither word is even pronounced the same. Please show PROOF that Pathahh and Qamatz in this situation are pronounced the same.

This is not the same as HaShem from the shoresh (Shin-Mem) which is spelled Hey (Pathakh)-Shin (Tzere)-Mem and means "The Named One," "The Renowned One," or "The Famed One." How do we know this because in Hebrew a Substantive Adjective is a noun, which is what HaShem is. A substantive by itself like Hhakham for example means "wise one" where when it is an adjective it means "wise." By extension hehhakham is translated as, "the wise one." (Basics of Biblical Hebrew, page 65) This are OFTEN used for example HaQadosh means "The Se-Apart One." Qedoshim means "Set-Apart Ones." Just as HaBorei doesn't simple mean "The Create" it can also mean "The One Who Creates." Just as HaMashi'ahh means "The Anointed one" (Analytical Hebrew and Chaldee Lexicon) and so it is not un-scriptural to call Eluwwim by a title.

In the Introduction Hebrew Dictionary page v. Strong's mentions that Qametz and Pathahh don't have the same sound. Thus Strong's agrees that there is no way that a Hey with (Qametz) could be confused with a Hey with (Pathahh) because they don't have the same sound. Thus for example entry number 4427 the Qametz is written as "aw" and the Pathahh is written as "a." Obviously Strong's believed that the Qametz and the Pathahh have different sounds this is even EASILY distinquished for someone who is not a Hebrew scholar.

As I mentioned before the whole point here is that Hey (Qametz) - Shin (Tzere) - Mem and Hey (Pathahh) - Shin (Tzere) - Mem and not the same and not confusable for people who know Hebrew or Aramaic. I further stated the following.

from http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Main_Page

Among the dialects of Hebrew preserved into modern times, Yemenite Hebrew is generally regarded as the form closest to Hebrew as used in ancient times, particularly Tiberian Hebrew and Mishnaic Hebrew. This is evidenced in part by the fact that Yemenite Hebrew preserves a separate sound for every consonant except for samekh and sin, which are both pronounced /s/.

There are two main pronunciations of Yemenite Hebrew, considered by many to be the most accurate form of Hebrew. Although there are technically five in total that relate to the regions of Yemen. In the Yemenite dialect, all Hebrew letters have a distinct sound, except for the letters samekh and sin.

How do Teimanim pronounce Hebrew? The following links show you.
http://www.chayas.com/prontable.jpg

This link shows you the vowels, and as you can see the Qametz and Qametz Hatuf have the same sound. That is as "o" as in "Cord." as compared to Pathahh, which sounds like "a."
http://www.chayas.com/prontab2.jpg

Rabbi Shraga Simmons agrees then with Strong's that Qametz and Pathahh are not the same. As Strong's suggests that the Pathahh is an "a" sound and the Qametz is an "aw" sound. Also, notice that you didn't mention to Rabbi Shraga about the Yemenite pronounciation of Hebrew, which I referenced in this regard.

Shimson wrote:
If you so desire to find 99% of Jews in the world then go ahead. Present to them EVERYTHING I presented to you EXACTLY as I presented and let me know what they say. Not just part of it, all of it including the information about the Teimaini form of Hebrew I have been telling you about.

In terms of your mention of what you and your family prefer to do, I will restate the following.

Shimson wrote:
ANYONE HERE WHO BELIEVES THAT THEY KNOW THE NAME OF ELOHIM CAN DO ANYTHING THEY WANT! I AM NOT TRYING TO CONVINCE ANYONE OF ANYTHING. A person asked a quesion, and I am answering. You don't have to like the answer.

Yet, I also don't see anything wrong with people "theorizing" and until Eluwwim makes it known these are ONLY theoretical if it was fact I wouldn't have been able to find 11 different ways people say it was pronounced. Yeshua even pointed this out when he mentioned people coming to him saying they did things in his name. There are many people who knew His Name and still will face the hot seat in Gehinam. May Yeshua HaMashi'ahh restore the Name of Eluwwim and the proper relationship with Eluwwim upon his return.

As I mentioned before you can do anything you desire on this issue, no one on this forum is forcing you to stop doing what you are doing.

Now with that being said I don't judge the Sacred Name movement for any of choices in the matter. If anything when ANYONE on this site and others have asked me my opinions on it I give it freely. I give both the pros and cons of any opinion I have on this matter. I don't think you can get more non-partisan than that.

I have mentioned several times that I am more than willing to tell people about ALL the theories with pros and cons.

As I have said over and over again, you can do anything you want on this issue. I haven't judge your intentions in this area in any way.

------------------
Eloah immakhem,

Shimson bar-Tzadoq