Darkness and Light

Hebrew Without Vowels or Accents

Lets look again at the Hebrew Bible without Vowels or Accents for Genesis 1: 1 to 5:

Samaritan Targum Interlinear Translation

In addition, let’s look at the interlinear translation of Genesis 1:2 to 5 on tanakh.info:

Facts About Hebrew

Now, we can add to our list of important facts about Hebrew  we learn from these verses:

8.   Sentences generally end with a colon, or a colon followed by the Hebrew letter pe פ which marks the end of a petuhah, like a paragraph in English.  The first paragraph in the Hebrew Bible includes Genesis 1: 1 to 5.

9.   Sentences other than the first one often begin with the letter waw ו (pronounced vav) that means ‘and’, showing its connection to the previous sentence.  There are claims that waw’s have been added and removed from the Hebrew Bible, so we can’t be completely confident whether a connection between sentences exists or not based solely on the presence or absence of waw ’s.  In this case, Gen 1: 2 to 5 all begin with a waw, possibly indicating their connection to Gen 1:1 and each other.

10.  Most Hebrew words are either verbs or from verbs.  For example, in Gen 1: 2 to 5 the noun ‘darkness’ חשך (Strong’s 2822) is from the verb ‘darkened’ חשך (Strong’s 2821), the preposition ‘over’ על (Strong’s 5921) is from the verb  ‘to go up’ על (Strong’s 5920), ‘the noun ‘light’ אור (Strong’s 216) is from the verb ‘be light’ אוֹר (Strong’s 215), the preposition ‘between’ בין  (Strong’s 996) is from the verb ‘to discern’ בין (Strong’s 995), the noun ‘evening’ ערב (Strong’s 6153) is from the verb ‘to grow dark’ ערב (Strong’s 6150), the noun ‘morning’ בקר (Strong’s 1242) is from the verb ‘to seek’ בקר  (Strong’s 1239), the adjective ‘first’ אחד (Strong’s 259) is from the verb ‘united, alike’ אחד (Strong’s 258).  In these cases, the noun, preposition, or adjective is a verb except for the vowel points which were added by scribes to the original text.

The original Hebrew text is robust, containing in one word both a literal and a figurative meaning at the same time.  The meaning of the noun darkness is literal – darkness, obscurity, but the verb darkness reveals the figurative meaning – misery, destruction, death, ignorance, sorrow, wickedness.  Similarly, light אור literally means light, but figuratively it means luminary in every sense including happiness, and I would add righteous – the opposite of wicked. 

John 1:5 supports a figurative meaning, personifying darkness, in stating that darkness “did not comprehend” the light.  Understanding the dual nature of the text reveals the broader meaning of the Genesis creation account.

11.  In Hebrew, like in English, prepositions precede a noun or pronoun, expressing a relationship to another word or element in the clause.  In this case, the preposition ‘over, on’ על occurs in two places; between ‘darkness’ and ‘the face of the deep’, and between “spirit of gods moved’ and ‘the face of the waters’, expressing where ‘darkness’ was and where the ‘spirit of gods moved’.

12.  Hebrew adjectives function similar to English ones, modifying nouns and pronouns.  Although ‘formless’ and ‘void’ are considered to be nouns in Strong’s Concordance, I consider them to be adjectives which modify (describe) the noun ‘earth’.  ‘Darkness’ and ‘light’ can be adjectives however they are functioning as nouns/verbs in these sentences.

13.  The Hebrew language appears to be built on a foundation of gender, but on close inspection we see that it is a construct of men designed to needlessly complicate the language, to disguise their true intent, which is elevation of masculine over feminine, supporting dominance of males over females.

  • The system of assigning gender to all nouns, not just persons, but places and things, which require grammatical modifiers (adjectives, active and passive participles, pronouns, and pronominal suffixes) to match, has made learning the Hebrew language seem insurmountable for the layman. As a result, many will not attempt to learn the language, and those who do, will consult with ‘experts’ who support that gender is of critical importance to understanding Hebrew, when we can easily prove it is not.
  • The designation ‘masculine’ and ‘feminine’ is arbitrary. Although gender can provide information about social gender, male and female, it seldom, if ever does so.  In the instances that gender is used in reference to things, objects and places, it is meaningless.  In the instances that gender purports to refer to male and/or female, it does so in a biased and erroneous manner with masculine taking precedence.  As a result, even though the Hebrew language appears to be gendered, the gender information it presents is,for the most part, irrelevant and/or incorrect.
  • Let’s look at how the Hebrew language uses gender to portray gods and angels, which are clearly dual (male and female) entities, as masculine:
    • In Hebrew, gender classification of nouns is made based on suffixes.
    • Generally (there are exceptions which also raise concerns), nouns are feminine singular when they contain the suffix he ה or taw ת and feminine plural with the suffix taw tav וֹת, and words not designated feminine, are masculine by default. As a result, angel מלאך, and angels מלאכי are masculine, in spite of the fact that angels are dual, male and female.
    • Plural nouns suffixed with yod and final mem ים are masculine, or dual (masculine and feminine) with a dot vowel point under the yod יִם, keeping in mind that vowel points were added in the middle ages by scribes and are not part of the original, inspired text. The noun gods אֱלֹהִ֑ים  does not contain a dot vowel point under the yod, thus is classified by scribes as masculine, not dual, male and female, in keeping with the true nature of god(s).

Given the flaws inherent in Hebrew grammatical gender, I am going to take an unorthodox approach and ignore the gender rules until I find compelling evidence that they add some meaning to God’s word.

Constructing The Sentences

Now that we’re comfortable with the meaning of the words, let’s construct the sentences – subject, verb, object, like we did for verse 1 in the previous article:

Genesis 1:2 has two major clauses.  In the first clause, the subject is ‘the earth’, the verb היתה which means ‘be, become’ and is most often translated as ‘came, become’ is translated in this case as ‘was’, indicating that ‘the earth was’ created ‘formless/waste’ and ‘void/empty’.  The translation of ‘be’ as ‘was’ is not supported by the second part of the clause which uses the same verb ‘become’ and  ‘darkness/wickedness over face deep’.  This is a critical distinction, because ‘darkness/wickedness’ was not created, but ‘became’ so afterward, as confirmed by Ezekiel 28:12 to 15 which reveals that the anointed cherub who covers was in Eden and blameless in his ways from the day he was created until unrighteousness was found in him.  In the second clause, the subject is ‘the spirit of gods’, the verb ‘hovering’, and the object ‘over the face of the waters’. 

Genesis 1:3 has two major clauses.  In the first clause, the subject is ‘gods’, the verb ‘said’, and the object what they said “Let there be light”.  The object of the previous clause is in itself a sentence with the subject ‘light’, the verbs ‘be’  and ‘be’, and the object ‘light’.

Genesis 1:4 has two major clauses.  In the first clause, the subject is ‘gods’, the verb ‘saw’, the object ‘the light was good’ which is a sub clause with ‘light as the subject, ‘be’ as the verb, and ‘good’ as the object.  In the second clause, the subject is ‘gods’, the verb ‘separated’, and the object ‘ space between the light and between the darkness’.

Genesis 1:5 has two major clauses.  In the first clause, the subject is ‘gods’, the verb ‘called’ and the object ‘the light day’ and a sub clause with the verb ‘called’ and object ‘darkness night’.   In the second clause, the subject is the ‘first day’, the verb ‘be’, and the object ‘evening’, and a sub clause with the verb ‘be’, and object ‘morning’.

Literal And Figurative Translation

Finally, we can translate all five sentences of the first paragraph, including both literal and figurative meanings where appropriate, to capture the full meaning:

In beginning created gods the heavens and the earth. And the earth became formless/waste and void/empty and darkness/wickedness was over face/before the deep/abyss and spirit gods hovered over the face/before the waters.  And said gods “let there be light” and be light.  And saw gods the light that good and divided/separated gods space between the light/righteous and space between the darkness/wicked.  And called gods light, day, and darkness called night, and there be evening/growing darkness and be morning/inquiring/seeking, day one.

Genesis 1: 1 to 5 literal/figurative translation

Analysis

The tweaking we did to the translation of these verses reveals some remarkable things:

  • God did not create the earth ‘formless and void’, nor did God create darkness/wickedness.  Satan, who was perfect when he was created, God’s anointed covering cherub, became wicked as confirmed in Ezek 28:12 to 15, which caused the earth to be waste and empty, meaning void of righteousness. 
  • Satan was God’s firstborn, the pre-existing darkness in these verses, but when God created light and saw that it was good, God separated the light/righteous from the darkness/wicked.  Satan lost the title of firstborn and the power and privilege associated with it to the Messiah, who God appointed firstborn, the highest of the kings of the earth Psalms 89:27.  Hence all the stories of ancient Israel where the firstborn failed to receive the title.
  • The Genesis creation account is dual, both literal and figurative at the same time.  The literal ‘day’ and ‘night’ that occurs in our physical reality represents the presence of righteousness and wickedness, and the literal ‘evening’ and ‘morning’ are on the fringe, representing ‘growing darkness’ and ‘seeking’, or those changing from wickedness to righteousness and vise verse.

In my next article, I will look at Genesis 1: 6 to 8.

In The Beginning

Studying scripture in the original Hebrew and Greek sounds like an impossible task, but scripture clearly states if we are born of the spirit and keep God’s commandments the Holy Spirit will be our guide John 14:21 to 26, 16:13 & 1 John 2:27.  Paul overcame Judaism through a revelation of Yahshua the Messiah, not from a man Gal 1: 11 – 13.  We can and must do the same.

Ancient Hebrew did not have vowels and accents, so let’s begin our study of Genesis using the Hebrew Bible without Vowel Points and accents, available on Jesus Spoke Aramaic.    Although the original text did not have spaces, it is very difficult to find the Hebrew text without spaces, and they should be more of a help than a hindrance until we gain more experience with the Hebrew alphabet, words, and sentences.

Hebrew Without Vowels or Accents

The text of Genesis 1: 1 – 5 appears as follows:

There are various free sources where we can view the Hebrew Bible in interlinear format – the Hebrew and English side by side.  My favorite resource is Biblehub.com which has a Hebrew Text Analysis for each verse, with word-by-word English translation and major Hebrew source texts. On Biblehub, Hebrew words link to Strong’s Concordance and Exhaustive Concordance, NASB Exhaustive Concordance, Brown-Driver-Briggs Dictionary providing robust drill down capability for most words.  Other resources include the parallel and interlinear text found on tanakh.info, and the word by word translation on shebanq.ancient-data.org.  It is prudent to use multiple sources to verify both the Hebrew and its translation into English.    

Samaritan Targum Interlinear Translation

Let’s take a look at the interlinear translation of Genesis 1:1 on tanakh.info, where the Hebrew text from the Samaritan Pentateuch and it’s English translation appear as follows:  

Facts About Hebrew

Looking at this sentence we can learn some important facts about Hebrew that we can build upon:

  1. Hebrew reads from right to left, the opposite of English.
  2. The first ‘word’  בראשית is actually a phrase, commonly translated as “In the beginning”. Concordances include minor words like ‘the’, ‘and’ with nouns and verbs, and Dictionaries describe the meaning of nouns and verbs with and without these additional characters in their analysis.
  3. There are 22 letters in the Hebrew alphabet.  You can create your own Hebrew Alphabet list and add information to help learn the Hebrew language as I have done, or you can use one of the many available for free on the internet.
  4. There are three common, single letter words in Genesis 1:1 that we can easily recognize which will help boost our understanding of Hebrew and our confidence.  The first is beth ב that means ‘in’, which is the first word in the Hebrew Bible.  The second is waw ו that means ‘and’ or ‘but’, and the third is he ה that means ‘the’, both are found in the phrase הארץ ואת “and the earth”. 
  5. Et את is the most common word in the Hebrew Bible, occurring over  11,000 times, over 25 times in Genesis 1, and 2 times in Genesis 1:1.  There is an et את between ‘God’ and ‘the heavens , and between ‘and’ and ‘the earth’ which according to Strong’s and NAS Exhaustive Concordances it is not translatable.   Brown Driver Briggs states that et is “the mark of the accusative, prefixed as a rule only to nouns that are definite”.  In this verse, et indicates that both “the heavens” and “the earth” are direct objects of the verb “create”.
  6. In ancient Hebrew, verbs did not represent whether they were past, present or future tense, but it is assumed based on the context of the sentence.  In Gen 1:1, because the sentence is describing an event that took place in the past, the verb ‘create’ is translated in the past tense, as ‘created’.
  7. Most Bibles are not literal, word for word, translations.  Words have been added, removed and mistranslated to support theological views.   In the first word בראשית  there is no he ה, yet every English translation adds ‘the’ to the phrase “In beginning”.  Both ‘God’ אלהים and ‘the heavens’ השמים are plural, as indicated by the suffix ים, yet  ‘God’ is not translated as plural in any Bible version.  This manipulation of the text can and often does insert translator bias which may impact our understanding of God’s message.  I propose to accept what the Hebrew text is saying, word for word, and deal with the theological implications later.

Analysis

Genesis 1:1 contains four nouns – beginning, gods, heavens, and earth, and one verb – create.  It would be prudent to research words as we come across them in our study and create a Dictionary of words we have vetted, that we can build on moving forward.  When we’re comfortable that the translation of the words is accurate, we can construct the sentence. 

Hebrew sentences are constructed just like English – subject – verb – object.    The subject of this sentence is what ‘gods’ did ‘first’, the verb describes the action that took place, in this case ‘create’, and the object of creation are ‘the heavens and the earth’. 

In my next article, I will look at Genesis 1:2 to 5.

Interpolation and Redaction in the Bible

Interpolations (meaning “the insertion of something of a different nature into something else”) play a major part in redaction (meaning edit, censor or obscure) of the inspired word of God. Other forms of redaction include translation into languages other than the original Hebrew and Greek, mistranslation of key words and phrases, and improper chapter division.  Identifying redaction requires a firm understanding of the message of all Bible text in the original Hebrew and Greek, and a comparison to highlight that which has a different message.

A prime example of the opposing messages found in the Bible is in the difference between the traditional teaching about Adam and Eve and Paul’s teaching.  As Jerome Murphy-O’Connor said in his article Interpolations in 1 Corinthians, it was Paul’s opinion that “Adam was the transgressor par excellence (Rom 5: 12-21, 1 Cor 15:21-22, 45-49); and Eve was the prototype of the entire Corinthian community and not merely of the feminine element (2 Cor 11:3)”.  This truth is obscured by interpolations in 1 Cor 14: 34-35 and the Pastoral Epistles in their entirety, tradition which continues to teach that Eve was the cause of the fall, and redaction of the Genesis creation account, all working in concert to support this lie.

This example reveals the intricacy with which tradition changed the word of God into a lie Jeremiah 8:8.    Traditionalists would have us hold their words in the same esteem as the words of God, but in many cases they contradict them, polluting God’s words with theirs, making it impossible to distinguish between their lies and the truth without a comprehensive analysis.  This leads many to question their faith in God or put their faith in the church and its traditions hoping to find salvation which is only found through the Messiah Gal 2:16.

If I had to guess, I’d estimate that at least half the text of the Bible is not inspired by God.  The problem is so pervasive, we need to divide the Bible in sections to test one at a time.  Testing includes researching source and text criticism.  From the example above we see that not all sources are inspired, and some that are have sections added to deceive us.  When we find text we believe is inspired, and that which is closest to the original, we need to test its translation.

With this in mind, let’s begin testing Genesis.

Is All Scripture Inspired?

One of the most important and most difficult decisions we must make is whether or not we believe “all scripture is inspired” as stated in 2 Tim 3:16.  As I stated in my article on Katharine Bushnell, there are two opposing schools of thought on this.  Some, like Katharine Bushnell, believe that “all scripture is inspired” and some, like Ray Munson, believe there are interpolations that need to be weeded out. 

According to Dr. Felix Just, 80% of scholars believe  the Pastoral Epistles and Ephesians  were not authored by Paul and “most likely written late in the first century by some member(s) of the ‘Pauline School’ who wanted to adapt his teachings to changing circumstances”.  Although he admits these writings are pseudepigraphic which means “false attribution of authorship”, works composed “as if it were written by a person from the past (the ‘attributed author), while the actual author was someone else (usually anonymous)”, he states that “these writings should not be called false writings”.  In his opinion, “judging a particular letter to be pseudepigraphic does not mean that it is any less valuable than the other letters, but only that it was written later by someone other than Paul” http://catholic-resources.org/Bible/Paul-Disputed.htm .   

Jerome Murphy-O’Connor, a leading authority on Paul and Professor of the New Testament, in an article titled Interpolations in 1 Corinthians, states “apart from the manifest contradictions, the principal reason for denying Pauline authorship of 14:34-35 is the invocation of the authority of the Law, as Paul never appeals to the Law in this manner”.  He points out that “vv34-35 are parallel to 1 Tim 2:11-15, not only in content but vocabulary” and opinions that 1 Tim 2:14 “is definitely un-Pauline in its attitude toward Adam and Eve: Adam was not deceived, but the woman was deceived and became the transgressor (v14).  For Paul, on the contrary, Adam was the transgressor par excellence (Rom 5:12-21, 1 Cor 15: 21-22, 45-49); and Eve was the prototype of the entire Corinthian community and not merely a feminine element (2 Cor 11:3).  The possibility that 1 Tim 2:11-15 is a return to a position once repudiated by Paul is discounted by what has been said concerning v36.”  In other words, he sees the contradictions as justification for disregarding their message.

I highly recommend going through the four part analysis on Cognitive Discopants titled Did Paul Write The Pastoral Epistles?  The author, Mason Slater, does a comprehensive analysis of the late attestation & mixed reception,  vocabulary & style, and lack of congruence with Paul’s journeys from other Pauline letters, all evidencing the likelihood that Paul was not the author.  He identifies that the Church tradition, teaching against Gnosticism, and Church structure all point to the “post-Pauline era”.  He identifies doctrinal differences between the Pastoral Epistles and Pauline writings, a different meaning for “keeping the faith” from referring to trust in God to trust in Church teachings, and “a more restrictive role for women”.  The alternate message is of great concern because it would leaven Paul’s teachings on vital issues.

The danger of these interpolations, is that they mix Paul’s teachings with a “different gospel” which is exactly what Paul warned against in Galatians 1:6.  The leaven in these verses replace faith in God with faith in Church tradition, subordinate women to men, and men to Church authorities, makes it appear that Paul considers the Law to hold authority over the congregation, and makes it appear that Eve was the transgressor not Adam, all of which are patently false.   Paul warned that those who distort the gospel of the Messiah are accursed in Gal 1:7 – 9. 

This evidences how challenging it is to find the truth.  Not only do we need to study scripture in its original languages, but we need to “test all things” 1 Thes 5:21, “weigh carefully what is said” 1 Cor 14:29, “test the spirits to see whether they are from God for many false prophets have gone out into the world” 1 John 4:1. We need to separate the truth from lies, because the truth sets us free John 8:32 from sin, sanctifies us John 17:17, leads us to holiness, and the outcome, eternal life Romans 6: 18 – 22, but lies are the works of Satan and his children 1 John 3:7 – 10 which keep us enslaved to sin, and the worthless elemental things in the world Gal 4:9. 

In my next article I will present a list of chapters and verses which are suspected interpolations.

Katharine Bushnell

In her book God’s Word to Women, Katharine Bushnell was successful in revealing some of the lies in the traditional understanding of Genesis,  making it a good place to begin our journey.

The late Katharine Bushnell (1856 to 1946) was a physician, missionary, author, and Greek and Hebrew  scholar.  Her book, God’s Word to Women, was originally published in 1910 and the last edition in 1923 was republished in 1943 by Ray Munson who recognized its value in drawing attention to inconsistencies in Pauline theology with respect to the female sex.  It is available in electronic form on the internet site by the same name, or a hard copy can be purchased at major book retailers for a reasonable price.

Bushnell’s goal was to point out the fallacies in the “scriptural” argument for the supremacy of the male sex, show the true position of women with God, and to encourage women to learn the Bible in its original tongues so they can refute these fallacies (#1).  To overcome false teachings, she recommended consulting God more than books, study scripture in its original language, as if we “had never seen it before, and knew nothing about it” (#18).  I heartily agree! By putting aside what we’ve been taught and studying scripture in the original languages, we cut out the false shepherds and follow  the Messiah, who as Yahweh promised will “Stand up over them shepherd to separate (echad translated ‘one’) and tend to covenant with them (eth not translated) in covenant with (eth not translated) my servant, beloved one (david translated ‘David’), he will tend in covenant with them (eth not translated) and he will be to them to shepherd.” Ezekiel 34:23. (Note: the re-translation of this sentence is based on what I have learned in my study of Hebrew to this point, adding depth and meaning to the sentence, emphasizing the separation function of the Messiah, which is critical.)

Bushnell was well aware of the obstacles that might impede our understanding of ancient Hebrew.  Vowel letters were added to the Hebrew text to indicate pronunciation which proved insufficient and vowel-signs were added “as late as 600-800 A.D.” (#6), neither of which were part of the original inspired text (#7).  Fortunately, today we have free resources like Biblehub.com which allow us to view the Hebrew text of multiple Bible versions in parallel, and provide a text analysis that links individual words in verses to Strong’s Concordance numbers, where we can access in-depth information about the word meaning and its origin.

Bushnell uncovered several fallacies in the traditional understanding of the Genesis creation account.  She identifies the androgynous state of the first man, and discusses the ‘fable of the rib’ in-depth.  She recognized that in Gen 2:18 the previously very good state of humanity had become “not good”, that the Hebrew bad does not mean ‘alone’ but something to do with ‘separation’, that the Hebrew ‘ezer’ is only used of God’s help, yet she still thought perhaps the woman was to help the man “recover himself”, not recognizing that God was trying to help/save the woman.  What she reveals evidences that the fall took place in Genesis 2, not 3, and the man was responsible, not the woman.

Bushnell believed “all scripture is inspired” as stated in 2 Tim 3:16, infallible Isaiah 40:8, and inviolable John 10:35 (#2). As a result, she tried to explain away the inconsistencies in writings attributed to Paul as a misinterpretation and leavened her beliefs with some lies which prevented her from seeing the whole truth.  Ray Munson, in the Foreword to her book, claims they are “the false pen of the scribes” quoting Jeremiah 8:8.  He considers the Pastoral Epistles and other obvious interpolations a perversion of Judaizing teachers which could not succeed in Pauls’ day, but now has blinded ministers to try and silence God’s ministry through the female sex by changing God’s truth into a lie Romans 1:25.  Who is correct?

In my next article, I will weigh the evidence as to whether all scripture is inspired or not.

Exit mobile version