quote:

Quote: "There is not Hebrew word (Heh-vav-Heh) that is Pronounced "haweh." And that is why I can not accept Yahweh as being correct. Is it correct that waw is Proto-Semitic?

quote:

ORIGINAL: benelchi

quote:

Quote: "There is not Hebrew word (Heh-vav-Heh) that is Pronounced "haweh." And that is why I can not accept Yahweh as being correct. Is it correct that waw is Proto-Semitic?

That is about as intelligent as saying you can't accept the English pronunciation of "pie" because there is not an English word "mie".

In Hebrew there are many words that end with the -eh ending. Hoveh (given in the previous post and from the same root as Yahweh), Moreh, rotzeh, modeh, honeh, horeh, maceh, hazeh, hateh, etc..., etc..., etc...

quote:

I don't mean to change the subject, but I'M trying to figure out this gender thing. Could it be derived from some ancient Pagan religious philosophy. I see no gender in the consonants. God says that he is male, and I see male names with ( ah ) in them. Is that good for anything? If Yahwah is male, then would Yahweh be female?

quote:

ORIGINAL: benelchi

quote:

I don't mean to change the subject, but I'M trying to figure out this gender thing. Could it be derived from some ancient Pagan religious philosophy. I see no gender in the consonants. God says that he is male, and I see male names with ( ah ) in them. Is that good for anything? If Yahwah is male, then would Yahweh be female?

Again the -ah ending is typically a female ending in Hebrew. Almost all masculine names that end with -ah really end with yh i.e. Yod-heh. This is because Yah is recognized as a abbriviation of YHVH, and it is part of the meaning of the name rather than an ending. The -ah ending is typically feminine, but the YH ending is not. In other words the YH ending stands on its own when seperated, but the H ending does not. The YH ending is used similar to to the 'el' ending.

Here are some examples:

Obadiah - Oved Yah - Servant [of] God

Zephaniah - Tsephan Yah - God Preserved

Zacharia - Zachar Yah - God Remembered


However, the -ah ending on feminine words does not stand alone, and when it is removed the word often becomes masculine. Some examples.

Uncle is Dod, but aunt is Dodah

Horse is Sus, but Mare is Susah

Boy is Yeled, Girl is Yaldah

Now to be fair YHVH doesn't really have the feminie -ah ending either because the final Hey is part of the root, and not a suffix, but it is a dirivitive of the masculine 3rd person imperfect and that usually has an -eh ending for roots with a final hey. In this case the prefixed Yod is the indication of the masculine singular, and the pattern of prefix and -eh ending is an indication of the imperfect verb form. The reason scholars have generally accepted the pronunciation of Yahweh is because it follows this general pattern.

Here are some examples of verb roots, the qal 3rd person masculine singular imperfect conjugation and its pronounciation:

NTH - YTH - yiteh

QRH - YQRH - yiqreh

R)H - YR)H - yireh

RTSH - YRTSH - yirtseh

There is not pattern of conjugation in the imperfect that has a -ah ending for these for lamed heh/lamed yod verbs.

quote:

It all looks very arbitrary to me. It seems that the Semitic gender vowel points are the opposite of other gendered languages. Like Michele and Michael. Could it be that gender is asigned to more words then what should be?

quote:

ORIGINAL: benelchi

quote:

It all looks very arbitrary to me. It seems that the Semitic gender vowel points are the opposite of other gendered languages. Like Michele and Michael. Could it be that gender is asigned to more words then what should be?

I don't know that I would say that Semitic languages are opposite of other languages, but they are more strongly gendered than some other languages. Semitic languages have no neuter form, everything is gendered as either masculine or feminine with almost no exception.

quote:

ORIGINAL: benelchi

quote:

It all looks very arbitrary to me. It seems that the Semitic gender vowel points are the opposite of other gendered languages. Like Michele and Michael. Could it be that gender is asigned to more words then what should be?

I don't know that I would say that Semitic languages are opposite of other languages, but they are more strongly gendered than some other languages. Semitic languages have no neuter form, everything is gendered as either masculine or feminine with almost no exception.

quote:

ORIGINAL: benelchi

quote:

It all looks very arbitrary to me. It seems that the Semitic gender vowel points are the opposite of other gendered languages. Like Michele and Michael. Could it be that gender is asigned to more words then what should be?

I don't know that I would say that Semitic languages are opposite of other languages, but they are more strongly gendered than some other languages. Semitic languages have no neuter form, everything is gendered as either masculine or feminine with almost no exception.

quote:

ORIGINAL: MichaelTheeArchAngel

YHWH doesn't not have the feminie h ending because the final Hey is part of the root, and not a suffix, but it is a dirivitive of the masculine 3rd person imperfect and that usually, but not always has an eh ending for roots with a final hey. In this case the prefixed Yod is the indication of the masculine singular, and the pattern of prefix and eh ending is an indication of the imperfect verb form. The reason scholars have generally accepted the pronunciation of Yahweh is because it follows this general pattern. Although Yahwah does not end in eh it still is prefixed by Yod as masculine singular.
I think your education is paying off Benelchi.

quote:

ORIGINAL: benelchi

quote:

It all looks very arbitrary to me. It seems that the Semitic gender vowel points are the opposite of other gendered languages. Like Michele and Michael. Could it be that gender is asigned to more words then what should be?

I don't know that I would say that Semitic languages are opposite of other languages, but they are more strongly gendered than some other languages. Semitic languages have no neuter form, everything is gendered as either masculine or feminine with almost no exception.

quote:

There is not pattern of conjugation in the imperfect that has a -ah ending for these for lamed heh/lamed yod verbs.

quote:

ORIGINAL: benelchi

quote:

ORIGINAL: MichaelTheeArchAngel

YHWH doesn't not have the feminie h ending because the final Hey is part of the root, and not a suffix, but it is a dirivitive of the masculine 3rd person imperfect and that usually, but not always has an eh ending for roots with a final hey. In this case the prefixed Yod is the indication of the masculine singular, and the pattern of prefix and eh ending is an indication of the imperfect verb form. The reason scholars have generally accepted the pronunciation of Yahweh is because it follows this general pattern. Although Yahwah does not end in eh it still is prefixed by Yod as masculine singular.
I think your education is paying off Benelchi.

quote:

ORIGINAL: benelchi

quote:

It all looks very arbitrary to me. It seems that the Semitic gender vowel points are the opposite of other gendered languages. Like Michele and Michael. Could it be that gender is asigned to more words then what should be?

I don't know that I would say that Semitic languages are opposite of other languages, but they are more strongly gendered than some other languages. Semitic languages have no neuter form, everything is gendered as either masculine or feminine with almost no exception.

As I pointed out in my previous post here:

quote:

There is not pattern of conjugation in the imperfect that has a -ah ending for these for lamed heh/lamed yod verbs.

The verb HYH is classified as a Lamed Hey/Lamed Yod verb, like most other Hebrew roots that end in a Heh. These verbs are recognized because the final hey is substituted for a Yod in man conjugations. The only Hebrew verbs that carry a -ah ending in the imperfect are are those verbs that are true Lamed Hey verbs (and do not display the Lamed Yod characteristic). These verbs keep the Hey intact in all conjugations.

Here are some examples of a true Lamend Heh verbs, and its infinitive, and its 1st person perfect

GBH - LGBH - GBHTY

TMH - LTMH - TMHTY

KMH - LCMH - CMHTY

and here are some examples of Lamed Heh / Lamed Yod verbs (including HYH from which YHWH is derived)

HYH - LHYOT - HYYTY

RBH - LRBOT - RBYTY

CBH - LCBOT - CBYTY

Did you notice that the Hey was lost in the infinitive of these roots, and changed to a Yod in the 1st person perfect?

Again the grammar rule for these verbs is that they NEVER have an 'ah' ending in the imperfect.


The standard reference if you would like to check is the "Luach Pa'alim" or table of Verbs, it lists the grammatical classification and complete conjugation of every Hebrew verb.

quote:

ORIGINAL: MichaelTheeArchAngel

I see what you are geting at. And I do believe you. But let me ask you; do you believe that those rules applied during the year 500 BC. From what I can see, is that the language has under gone a lot of change since then.

quote:

ORIGINAL: benelchi

quote:

ORIGINAL: MichaelTheeArchAngel

YHWH doesn't not have the feminie h ending because the final Hey is part of the root, and not a suffix, but it is a dirivitive of the masculine 3rd person imperfect and that usually, but not always has an eh ending for roots with a final hey. In this case the prefixed Yod is the indication of the masculine singular, and the pattern of prefix and eh ending is an indication of the imperfect verb form. The reason scholars have generally accepted the pronunciation of Yahweh is because it follows this general pattern. Although Yahwah does not end in eh it still is prefixed by Yod as masculine singular.
I think your education is paying off Benelchi.

quote:

ORIGINAL: benelchi

quote:

It all looks very arbitrary to me. It seems that the Semitic gender vowel points are the opposite of other gendered languages. Like Michele and Michael. Could it be that gender is asigned to more words then what should be?

I don't know that I would say that Semitic languages are opposite of other languages, but they are more strongly gendered than some other languages. Semitic languages have no neuter form, everything is gendered as either masculine or feminine with almost no exception.

As I pointed out in my previous post here:

quote:

There is not pattern of conjugation in the imperfect that has a -ah ending for these for lamed heh/lamed yod verbs.

The verb HYH is classified as a Lamed Hey/Lamed Yod verb, like most other Hebrew roots that end in a Heh. These verbs are recognized because the final hey is substituted for a Yod in man conjugations. The only Hebrew verbs that carry a -ah ending in the imperfect are are those verbs that are true Lamed Hey verbs (and do not display the Lamed Yod characteristic). These verbs keep the Hey intact in all conjugations.

Here are some examples of a true Lamend Heh verbs, and its infinitive, and its 1st person perfect

GBH - LGBH - GBHTY

TMH - LTMH - TMHTY

KMH - LCMH - CMHTY

and here are some examples of Lamed Heh / Lamed Yod verbs (including HYH from which YHWH is derived)

HYH - LHYOT - HYYTY

RBH - LRBOT - RBYTY

CBH - LCBOT - CBYTY

Did you notice that the Hey was lost in the infinitive of these roots, and changed to a Yod in the 1st person perfect?

Again the grammar rule for these verbs is that they NEVER have an 'ah' ending in the imperfect.


The standard reference if you would like to check is the "Luach Pa'alim" or table of Verbs, it lists the grammatical classification and complete conjugation of every Hebrew verb.

And what about a compound word such as Yahwah?

quote:

ORIGINAL: benelchi

The best evidence we have is that the grammar has not changed that much, but some scholars do believe that much earlier than 500 BC the Lamed Heh/ Lamed Yod verbs were possibly only Lamed Yod verbs. More to the point the known grammar changes would not indicated an -ah ending for the imperfect of a Lamed Heh/ Lamed Yod verb at any time in past history. Any claim of such would be entirely based on conjecture without evidence, or even reason for that conjecture.

While I can continue to give you all of the reason scholars have generally accepted the Yahweh pronunciation, I think the bigger point is that even that is somewhat conjecture (mostly because of the slightly unusual form of the yod/vav substitution of the ayin yod. This means that all scholars can do is make their best educated guess.

Also Yahwah is not a compound word, it is a simple conjugation of the root HYH, the additional letter do not form a new word but simply auxiliary letter in the conjugation.


From a theological perspective, how we pronounce this representation of God's name is just not that important. The information I have provided you is things I learned as I studied Hebrew; however, I did not study Hebrew to learn how to pronounce God's name but so that I could further my study of God's word. I believe that is far more important, and I would encourage you to spend your time in God's word, learning more about who God is rather then spending so much time trying to figure out how to pronounce his name.

quote:

ORIGINAL: MichaelTheeArchAngel

quote:

ORIGINAL: benelchi

The best evidence we have is that the grammar has not changed that much, but some scholars do believe that much earlier than 500 BC the Lamed Heh/ Lamed Yod verbs were possibly only Lamed Yod verbs. More to the point the known grammar changes would not indicated an -ah ending for the imperfect of a Lamed Heh/ Lamed Yod verb at any time in past history. Any claim of such would be entirely based on conjecture without evidence, or even reason for that conjecture.

While I can continue to give you all of the reason scholars have generally accepted the Yahweh pronunciation, I think the bigger point is that even that is somewhat conjecture (mostly because of the slightly unusual form of the yod/vav substitution of the ayin yod. This means that all scholars can do is make their best educated guess.

Also Yahwah is not a compound word, it is a simple conjugation of the root HYH, the additional letter do not form a new word but simply auxiliary letter in the conjugation.


From a theological perspective, how we pronounce this representation of God's name is just not that important. The information I have provided you is things I learned as I studied Hebrew; however, I did not study Hebrew to learn how to pronounce God's name but so that I could further my study of God's word. I believe that is far more important, and I would encourage you to spend your time in God's word, learning more about who God is rather then spending so much time trying to figure out how to pronounce his name.

The body of Christ has many members with different functions. You have been a lot of help to me. Thank you. Where I'M coming from is the Northwest Semitic and it's sub group. Now I need to figure an about time frame, where the Aramaic and Hebrew diverged from each other. That is what brought about the change in our understanding of Yah and Wah. Do you follow what I'm saying? I need a time frame for these sub groups.

quote:

ORIGINAL: benelchi

quote:

ORIGINAL: MichaelTheeArchAngel

quote:

ORIGINAL: benelchi

The best evidence we have is that the grammar has not changed that much, but some scholars do believe that much earlier than 500 BC the Lamed Heh/ Lamed Yod verbs were possibly only Lamed Yod verbs. More to the point the known grammar changes would not indicated an -ah ending for the imperfect of a Lamed Heh/ Lamed Yod verb at any time in past history. Any claim of such would be entirely based on conjecture without evidence, or even reason for that conjecture.

While I can continue to give you all of the reason scholars have generally accepted the Yahweh pronunciation, I think the bigger point is that even that is somewhat conjecture (mostly because of the slightly unusual form of the yod/vav substitution of the ayin yod. This means that all scholars can do is make their best educated guess.

Also Yahwah is not a compound word, it is a simple conjugation of the root HYH, the additional letter do not form a new word but simply auxiliary letter in the conjugation.


From a theological perspective, how we pronounce this representation of God's name is just not that important. The information I have provided you is things I learned as I studied Hebrew; however, I did not study Hebrew to learn how to pronounce God's name but so that I could further my study of God's word. I believe that is far more important, and I would encourage you to spend your time in God's word, learning more about who God is rather then spending so much time trying to figure out how to pronounce his name.

The body of Christ has many members with different functions. You have been a lot of help to me. Thank you. Where I'M coming from is the Northwest Semitic and it's sub group. Now I need to figure an about time frame, where the Aramaic and Hebrew diverged from each other. That is what brought about the change in our understanding of Yah and Wah. Do you follow what I'm saying? I need a time frame for these sub groups.

Distinctions in the Northwestern group of Semitic langauges is found very early. One of the earliest dated finds is the tablets from Tell el-Amarna (dated around 1400 BC). The Northwestern group contains not only Hebrew, and Aramaic, but also Ugartic, and Canaanite-Phoenician. All of these languages share a similar structure and sound, and share vocabulary. Here is an example of words common to all of these languages, av - father, yd - hand, byt - house, ktb - write.

quote:

ORIGINAL: MichaelTheeArchAngel

Very good, thank you. Now here is a VERY important question: How certain are you that HaWeh or Weh are not a Hebrew word? You have been a messenger of God.

quote:

ORIGINAL: benelchi

quote:

ORIGINAL: MichaelTheeArchAngel

quote:

ORIGINAL: benelchi

The best evidence we have is that the grammar has not changed that much, but some scholars do believe that much earlier than 500 BC the Lamed Heh/ Lamed Yod verbs were possibly only Lamed Yod verbs. More to the point the known grammar changes would not indicated an -ah ending for the imperfect of a Lamed Heh/ Lamed Yod verb at any time in past history. Any claim of such would be entirely based on conjecture without evidence, or even reason for that conjecture.

While I can continue to give you all of the reason scholars have generally accepted the Yahweh pronunciation, I think the bigger point is that even that is somewhat conjecture (mostly because of the slightly unusual form of the yod/vav substitution of the ayin yod. This means that all scholars can do is make their best educated guess.

Also Yahwah is not a compound word, it is a simple conjugation of the root HYH, the additional letter do not form a new word but simply auxiliary letter in the conjugation.


From a theological perspective, how we pronounce this representation of God's name is just not that important. The information I have provided you is things I learned as I studied Hebrew; however, I did not study Hebrew to learn how to pronounce God's name but so that I could further my study of God's word. I believe that is far more important, and I would encourage you to spend your time in God's word, learning more about who God is rather then spending so much time trying to figure out how to pronounce his name.

The body of Christ has many members with different functions. You have been a lot of help to me. Thank you. Where I'M coming from is the Northwest Semitic and it's sub group. Now I need to figure an about time frame, where the Aramaic and Hebrew diverged from each other. That is what brought about the change in our understanding of Yah and Wah. Do you follow what I'm saying? I need a time frame for these sub groups.

Distinctions in the Northwestern group of Semitic langauges is found very early. One of the earliest dated finds is the tablets from Tell el-Amarna (dated around 1400 BC). The Northwestern group contains not only Hebrew, and Aramaic, but also Ugartic, and Canaanite-Phoenician. All of these languages share a similar structure and sound, and share vocabulary. Here is an example of words common to all of these languages, av - father, yd - hand, byt - house, ktb - write.

quote:

My Hebrew teacher drilled into us Hebrew grammar rules that are almost never used in Israel any more, like the distinction of 'be-'/'im'. (with/with).

quote:

I am one of the few "goyim" who studied Hebrew in college.

quote:


Ben:
It's kind of like trying to find a English word to describe Chootspah; something that very accurately describes some of the posts in this thread!

Michael:
It takes chutzpah and hutzpahs

quote:

I am assuming you must be of Jewish Background, is that correct?

quote:

I did not study Hebrew to learn how to pronounce God's name but so that I could further my study of God's word. I believe that is far more important, and I would encourage you to spend your time in God's word, learning more about who God is rather then spending so much time trying to figure out how to pronounce his name.

quote:

Being a scholar usually disqualifies people from having common sense - you managed to retain it abundantly.

quote:

ORIGINAL: benelchi

Yes, I am certain. There is no word in Hebrew with the letters Heh-vav-Heh that would be pointed to sound like "Haweh"; there is 'heweh', 'howeh', 'hawah', etc...

No, there is not a hebrew word 'Wah' from the letters vav-heh.

quote:

ORIGINAL: MichaelTheeArchAngel

Very good, thank you. Now here is a VERY important question: How certain are you that HaWeh or Weh are not a Hebrew word? You have been a messenger of God.

quote:

ORIGINAL: benelchi

quote:

ORIGINAL: MichaelTheeArchAngel

quote:

ORIGINAL: benelchi

The best evidence we have is that the grammar has not changed that much, but some scholars do believe that much earlier than 500 BC the Lamed Heh/ Lamed Yod verbs were possibly only Lamed Yod verbs. More to the point the known grammar changes would not indicated an -ah ending for the imperfect of a Lamed Heh/ Lamed Yod verb at any time in past history. Any claim of such would be entirely based on conjecture without evidence, or even reason for that conjecture.

While I can continue to give you all of the reason scholars have generally accepted the Yahweh pronunciation, I think the bigger point is that even that is somewhat conjecture (mostly because of the slightly unusual form of the yod/vav substitution of the ayin yod. This means that all scholars can do is make their best educated guess.

Also Yahwah is not a compound word, it is a simple conjugation of the root HYH, the additional letter do not form a new word but simply auxiliary letter in the conjugation.


From a theological perspective, how we pronounce this representation of God's name is just not that important. The information I have provided you is things I learned as I studied Hebrew; however, I did not study Hebrew to learn how to pronounce God's name but so that I could further my study of God's word. I believe that is far more important, and I would encourage you to spend your time in God's word, learning more about who God is rather then spending so much time trying to figure out how to pronounce his name.

The body of Christ has many members with different functions. You have been a lot of help to me. Thank you. Where I'M coming from is the Northwest Semitic and it's sub group. Now I need to figure an about time frame, where the Aramaic and Hebrew diverged from each other. That is what brought about the change in our understanding of Yah and Wah. Do you follow what I'm saying? I need a time frame for these sub groups.

Distinctions in the Northwestern group of Semitic langauges is found very early. One of the earliest dated finds is the tablets from Tell el-Amarna (dated around 1400 BC). The Northwestern group contains not only Hebrew, and Aramaic, but also Ugartic, and Canaanite-Phoenician. All of these languages share a similar structure and sound, and share vocabulary. Here is an example of words common to all of these languages, av - father, yd - hand, byt - house, ktb - write.