What advantage then hath the Jew? or what profit is there of circumcision? Much every way: chiefly, because that unto them were committed the oracles of God. Romans 3:1-2 Notice that the Old Testament oracles of God were not committed to the Greeks. In a synagogue in the 1st century, one could only read the Hebrew scrolls or the Targum (a translation of the Hebrew Bible into Aramaic). Greek was forbidden. Recall that Antiochus Epiphanes desecrated the Solomon’s temple circa 170 BC. Thus, the need for Herod to build the 2nd temple. The Jews of the 1st century despised the Greeks, for that and other reasons. Recall what Peter said in Acts 10:28 ”…, Ye know how that it is an unlawful thing for a man that is a Jew to keep company, or come unto one of another nation;” Recall what happened when it was rumored that Paul brought a Greek into the Temple in Acts 21:28 “Crying out, Men of Israel, help: This is the man, that teacheth all men everywhere against the people, and the law, and this place: and further brought Greeks also into the temple, and hath polluted this holy place.” This event precipitated Paul’s journey to Rome resulting ultimately in his martyrdom. If the Jews refused to keep company with men of other nations what makes anyone think that they would tolerate the language of other nations being read in a synagogue? Some scholars say that Hebrew was lost to the Jews by the first century and only Greek was spoken. If the Jews lost their language, why was Paul speaking to the people in the Hebrew tongue? “And when he had given him licence, Paul stood on the stairs and beckoned with the hand unto the people. And when there was made a great silence, he spake unto them in the Hebrew tongue, saying, Men, brethren, and fathers, hear ye my defense which I make now unto you. (And when they heard that he spake in the Hebrew tongue to them, they kept the more silence: and he saith,): Acts 21:40 - 22:2. If the Jews lost their language, why when Paul met Jesus on the Damascus road, why did Jesus speak to him in Hebrew? "And when we were all fallen to the earth, I heard a voice speaking unto me, and saying in the Hebrew tongue, Saul, Saul, why persecutest thou me?..." Acts 26:14 The only evidence for a BC Septuagint is the letter of Aristeas (LOA), which no one believes but everyone quotes. It is a fantastic tale (read fantasy). There is no reference to a Septuagint prior to Philo of Alexandria 50 AD (+/-). If you trace all the reference to a BC Septuagint, you will find that each and every on them reference the LOA to one degree or another. Josephus is often referred to as an independent witness to the Septuagint, but Josephus does nothing more than plagiarize the LOA and change the first person singular pronouns to second or thirds person singular pronouns. Some historian! If one believes the LOA, one has to believe also that the 10 northern tribes of Israel were not dispersed to four winds after 721 BC, from which diaspora they never returned. Rather you have to believe that they were still in Israel in 285 BC, since the LOA claims that 6 scribes from each of the 12 tribes of Israel were assembled in Egypt by Ptolemy II Philadelphus. Incidentally, a land to which the Jews were forbidden ever to return to (*). Incidentally, none of the ancient writers who refer to the LOA agree on which Ptolemy it was. (*) . Deuteronomy 17:16, Deuteronomy 28:68, Jeremiah 42:13-17, Jeremiah chapter 44. Only the Levites were allowed to copy the scriptures (with the exception of the King who had to make a copy for himself by law). So, one has to add to that belief that 72 scribes (not Levites) defiled themselves among the Greeks and defied the scriptures and God’s express wishes in order to copy the scriptures as well as going to a land to which they were forbidden. Moreover, add to that belief, that 72 scribes, each without a copy of the Hebrew scriptures, translated them from memory into Greek in 72 days and every single word was identical, all the while being locked up in 72 chambers on the isle of Pharos without any collaboration between them. ( by the way, why is it called LXX "The 70" and not LXXII 72?) Incidentally, the Pharos light house was not built until 280 BC, 5 years after the blessed event. A minor point. To sum up, we are to believe that God inspired the work of 72 (not 70) disobedient, non-Levitical scribes who rendered 72 identical copies of the Hebrew scriptures from memory into Greek. Really? Incidentally, (may I say ”Incidentally” again?), the LOA section 176 says that the whole scroll was written in gold. Really? Where is it? You’d think that someone would have a vested interest in preserving such a priceless document. It doesn’t exist! If you were to get a copy of the Septuagint, you would find that it is nothing more than the Old Testament portions of the codex Alexandrinus, the codex Sinaiticus and the codex Vaticanus, along with the Apocrypha (depending which edition you have). Luke 24:44 “And he said unto them, These are the words which I spake unto you, while I was yet with you, that all things must be fulfilled, which were written in the law of Moses, and in the prophets, and in the psalms, concerning me." The Law of Moses, The Prophets, and The Psalms" is how the Jews organized the Old Testament. There is no Greek copy anywhere in any century which organizes the Old Testament in that fashion. Jesus was not quoting a Septuagint. The only witness that anyone can point to, definitively, is the LOA. You really should read it. It is just not believable. And scholars have read it, and they don't believe it! But yet they point to it as proof. "But everybody knows, and all scholars agree... ". Be careful of the "argument from authority" which is what quoting “all scholars” is. It is very often the case that "all scholars" are quoting from someone who they hold in authority who just happened to be wrong. All Hebrew scholars agreed that “Baca” meant mulberry trees. They were all quoting a Hebrew scholar named Burchart. Dr Robert Dick Wilson of Princeton University proved conclusively that Baca meant aqueduct. “Who passing through the valley of Baca make it a well; the rain also filleth the pools.” Psalm 84:6. How does passing through the valley of mulberry trees make it a well? It doesn’t! its nonsensical. But passing through the valley of an aqueduct makes perfect sense to make it a well. Supposedly the LXX was written for the disaffected Jews living in Alexandria Egypt. That part has a ring of truth. But what would possess Jesus Christ to quote from it in Israel, where the vast majority of the population spoke Hebrew or Aramaic. The Scribes and Pharisees and Sadducees certainly spoke Hebrew and despised the Greeks and their language. Greek had been imposed on them by their oppressors the Romans and the Greeks before them. "...,And the common people heard him gladly." Mark 12:37. Heard Him gladly doing what? Reading from a Greek Old Testament? I don’t think so! You will say to me that "the Dead Sea Scrolls contain the LXX". They don't. They contain a few scraps of Old Testament words in Greek, certainly not the LXX. Carsten Thiede author of Rekindling the Word wrote that there are 6 fragments with a few Greek words that match what we call the Septuagint. Not even enough to fill a whole page. He says all the Greek fragments can be dated reliably only to the 1st century sometime before 68 AD. You will say that the earlier English translations included the apocryphal books as part of the old testament and that he KJB translators included the Apocrypha. They include the apocryphal books because it was part of their mandate from the king, but they placed them in a separate section called the “Apocrypha” which means “not considered genuine”. And they headed each page with the title Apocrypha to dispel any doubt that they did not consider these books to be genuine. A book is considered to part of the cannon of scripture if it was quoted by Jesus or written by and apostle or was quoted by an apostle. If you believe that Jesus and or the apostles quoted from the Septuagint, they by that definition you have to include the Apocrypha into the cannon of scripture. And for that reason, you have to also believe Jesus endorsed: • paying indulgences for the dead! • approving the committing Suicide! • An angel of God lied! • praying for the dead! • Praying to the dead (saints) • Sorcery and Magic! • praying to angels! • purgatory! The Septuagint? Really?

I use this but sometimes the root word here is different from primitive root provided in concordance Just like the Ruach which is a root word from Riyach Sowd root is yasad In this website it is not mentioned

Thanks

Thanks for your video! It was very clear and to the point, much better than the textbook I'm using.

Isaiah 7 and 8 provides one of many ways to be almost certain the Hebrew came first. In Isaiah 7 and 8 there is a boy born of a young woman. There is nothing miraculous about the boy or the birth, including into his young life in chapter 8. But in the Greek the young woman is a virgin and not yet pregnant, despite the context not supporting that. There is no other virgin in the Torah, so that would be an astounding miracle. Yet she and her son are treated as normal people in the text. The birth is a sign to Ahaz. Signs are visible and usually not (never?) miraculous. Lack of sex is not visible, so *a virgin birth cannot be a sign;* the boy’s early years are the sign. (thanks to Rabbi T Singer for the points on signs - I verify these things; I don’t just pick someone to believe).

A very comprehensive lesson. Thank you, sir. I am immensely grateful to the developers of KZbin, and I am immensely grateful to the likes of you.

This is a little bit confusing. Are the words in right columns abbreviations of the words in left column? I can see that "bi" an abb of "b-ani" But how is "b:acha" an abb of "bachem" ???

Thanks, Really helpful.

This is such an excellent and helpful video. Thanks. Really appreciate the calm and orderly presentation.

like arabic, taktol, naktol, katl...

sames like arabic, taktol

Americans can only speak one language, and sound dumb trying anything else.

Overall good information, but I have one comment. The term "Hebrew bible" is very open eneded. There is not one Hebrew text. For example, there is a big difference between the Hebrew text in the 4th century which Jerome used and the Hebrew text in the 3rd BC which the LXX translators used (the LXX Vorlage). So the competition is not between the Hebrew original and a Greek translation, but rather a newer Hebrew copy vs. the older Hebrew Vorlage of the LXX. Both are Hebrew texts and both do not match, as the Samaritan Pentateuch and Dead Sea Scrolls prove. In many places the LXX has been more faithful to the older Hebrew text than Jerome's Hebrew copy and the Leningrad Codex. Both Jerome's Hebrew text and the Masoretic text contain scribal edits and errors which the LXX Vorlage did not have. This makes the LXX an invaluable tool when reconstructing the original text and no less authoritative than the "Hebrew Bible".

Thank you. Helps Long v short make sense. Long at end - emphasis. Weird daggesh means double sound. That explains some things things. And so on. Thank you.

I discovered your channel just a few days ago and I find your videos so interesting, especially this type that shows the games played with scripture by the New Testament authors. Thanks for sharing!

The Enoch point was cool to know but this was all very complicated and a little incoherent. One genealogy mentions mary. The one in luke does not. Could it be that Matthew is Mary's genealogy?

Nobody can seem to answer this question... How can gender make a sentence different (EVERYTHING always yaks on sex.. WHICH I KNOW lol). But if you could provide a example. Im assuming like the Greek it's a way to group the related words together... So i know it won't be all the time. But I'm sure it does (non male female) sometimes. Got anything? Or even just something say "feminine gender can't be" (other than a man lol)

Thanks a lot! You do explain rules so well!

Please the title of this biblical Hebrew grammar ? Or the ISBN number. Thank you.

This is at page 41. Of which biblical Hebrew grammar ? Anyone has the title of the book ? Or the ISBN number . Thank you.

Thanks for the practical example. I had a quick look through some of the English translations. The "to me" is in KJV derivatives and the RSV. The ASV seems to footnote the alternative reading. And pretty much everything else was as the Ketiv. I guess in English the "to me" may sound redundant, but it certainly emphasises the personal nature of the promise made my Ruth to Naomi.

There was no palestine until after the destruction of the 2nd Temple. Also there is no mention of palestine in the quran.

Very nice, thank you. For the notation about Zerubbabel, see Haggai. Promises for Zerubbabel On that same day, December 18, the Lord sent this second message to Haggai: “Tell Zerubbabel, the governor of Judah, that I am about to shake the heavens and the earth. 22I will overthrow royal thrones and destroy the power of foreign kingdoms. I will overturn their chariots and riders. The horses will fall, and their riders will kill each other. “But when this happens, says the Lord of Heaven’s Armies, I will honor you, Zerubbabel son of Shealtiel, my servant. I will make you like a signet ring on my finger, says the Lord, for I have chosen you. I, the Lord of Heaven’s Armies, have spoken!” I ran into this with my look at Matthew's genealogy years back, and this satisfied me.

the diference between MT and LXX is well described but the interpretation is extremely missleading. Just to summarize at 25:19 henrew is oroginal language but you do not have the original text in MT. MT origin is cca 11 ad. Also, after Christ rabbi Akiva (who by the way believed Bar Kochba is the Messiah) started to collate the hebrew OT in such a way to disapprove Christianiy. Aquila translation was done for the same purpose and also translated from Aliva collation. So there is diception and dishonesty in the same way as always was from the pharisees / rabbis. The LXX is translation of the Old Hebrew original text not corrupted MT text. (sorry for my spelling, english is not my native language).

Irenaeus was a theological giant....a great man of God indeed.

God ALMIGHTY אל שדי bless you for sharing free education!! keep up the good work please!!!!

Is this biblical Hebrew or modern Hebrew?

comparing the Septuagint to something written a thousand years later is just bad textual criticism

it's erroneous to just assume that the septuagint simply translated those passages incorrectly. it's more likely that they translated from a hebrew text that was much older than the masoretic text you're comparing it to

Excellent explanation, but according to Dr. William Barrick you can't form a syllable with ANY kind of SHEVA, simple or composite.

Very helpful. Well presented and clear explanations. Thank you 😊

Great video! Never noticed that when looking at the book of Ruth in Hebrew!

אני מ בקזל

טוב מאו, אני צריכה ללמוד עברית

thanks bro pls next vido paret 2,,,

The accent is in the wrong place in the first and second person plural. It can't go further than the third syllable back.

The difference between the present infinitive and the aorist infinite is one of aspect. The present infinitive indicates continuity and the aorist infinitive indicates something happening once or now.

Your presentations are hugely helpful. I first learned, and forgot, Hebrew grammar in pre-seminary studies. This is a review that I hope will help make Hebrew a permanent part of my resource bank.

Thanks for the video but why do you talk like that

10:42 just a quick question: Google translate suggest הם טובים instead of טובים הם for - they are good. Any one?

I agree, this is good! I am doing a repetition as I already have done all the verb groups ands their inflections! So to you that are new, pay attention to the patterns. It will be more of that when you come across verb groups and roots etc Learning about roots שורש was a door kicker for me for understanding how Hebrew is pronounced, how niqqud works etc As you can see from this example it isn’t just adding ים ות ת it is also a niqqud ie the dots and dashes that indicate vowel sounds… Pay attention to the niqqud too. There’s a pattern…

Thank you

Thank you for this video

I challenge anyone to translate this text in Koine Greek that I have just written: Και εν ουρανω, εγω ειδον τους αγγελους και τους αγιους του Θεου, και οι αγιοι του Θεου παρακαλουσιν τω Θεω, λεγουσιν, "Ω Θεε! Ω Θεε! Ω Θεε! Ακουε ημας και αποστελλε απωλεια και οργην εις τω κοσμω!", και εγω ειδον τον Θεον, και αυτος ην επι τον Θρονον του Ουρανου, και ο Θρονος του Ουρανου ην επι τον προσοπον της γης. Τοτε, εις των αγγελων ηγγικεν με, και εδωκεν μοι τον βιβλον, και γεγραπται εν τον βιβλον...

Τι χάλια είναι αυτή η προφορά, αχρηστεύει το βίντεο!

You do write Acts when the end is imminent if your audience is suffering persecution and needs to see itself as a part of the Apostles’ team in order to endure. The Gospels and Acts weren’t written for posterity. They were written to encourage persecuted believers. Seeing them through that lens changes everything.

It's easy and clear. 70ad. The Kingdom is now and spiritual, and when you die, you will be raised and face it. I think the problem we have is that it's hard for us to really understand the Torah and the Temple. That was the Kingdom. Now it's "not of this world", and you access it through the temple in your heart. Almost all of these passages point back to the Old Testament, and relate to the destruction of the Temple. The meaning that held for them, is just much different than what it holds for us.

Much thanks for the lesson :))

🙋‍♂️🤝🆗️

The position of the tone is changed in the 1st and 2nd plural as it is on the 3rd last syllable.