The Name Yehovah Found 1015 Times in Ancient Hebrew Manuscripts

In this video published on January 25, 2018, Hebrew scholar, Nehemia Gordon discusses manuscript evidence for the pronunciation of the personal name of YHVH with his team of researchers. Gordon and his team have been searching ancient Hebrew manuscripts of the Tanakh (OT) that go back to the ninth century A.D. After searching through thousands of ancient manuscripts and visually looking for the Hebrew letters Y-H-V-H, they have found 1015 instances where the Jewish sages have filled in the vowel points of these four letters for the name of Elohim so that it reads Yehovah. To date, they have not found a single instance where Y-H-V-H has been written as Yahweh. At 41:40 in the video, Gordon and Keith Johnson discuss this fact. Gordon has put together a data base listing the places in the Bible where the name Yehovah occurs along with the name of the ancient manuscript in which Yehovah is found.

Here is a short version of this info:

In this short video, Nehemia Gordon explains why the six letter in the Hebrew alphabet is pronounced as a v and and not as a w. This information has a profound impact on how to vocalize or pronounce the personal name of YHVH.

This video is an abbreviated version of a much longer teaching Nehemia presented on his website where he gives more examples from ancient Hebrew manuscripts why the vav was correctly pronounced as a v and not as w by most ancient Hebrew speaking Jews, as well as how the w pronunciation came into the Hebrew language much later. He shows actual photos of these manuscripts in the longer version.

 

20 thoughts on “The Name Yehovah Found 1015 Times in Ancient Hebrew Manuscripts

  1. Shalom Natan

    I had come across this too but there is a counter argument that the vowel markings placed on the tetragrammaton are there to indicate to the reader Adonai to be spoken out loud.

    I am not a scholar of Hebrew in the slightest and haven’t delved further into this as it seems so divisive. It is interesting that the source, Nehemiah is a very controversial figure within a sect of Judaism as well.

    Having both those who think very highly of him to those that denounce his endeavours. He is not a believer in Messiah having already come, which makes me want to be careful too.

    Oi Vei.. this is a pretty amazing time with so much to test in love. I don’t want to bag the ” correct pronounciation” of the name to find out I was almost but not quite right & offending those who believe as I do, except for this.

    I think I have spoken with you about this before in pronunciation being used by to determine who the enemy was but ultimately they only ended up killing their brothers Israel, because of hardness of heart and not doing what God said to do in the first place.

    In this computer page if I write the word pronounciation the way my Australian English spells the word, it is underlined in red as incorrect but on whose say so……that is sort of what I am getting at.

    I actually say Yehovah and used to say Yahway.

    Take care & thankyou for all the earnest digging and sweating to aid the Kingdom in Coming.
    Love in Messiah.
    F J

    • I want to respond to two things you said, which I hear people saying over and over again.

      First, that the vowels of Adonai are to be found in Yehovah. Well, that’s not exactly the case. Nehemia Gordon addresses this issue over and over again and shows that its a fallacy in his videos including one of the one’s I have posted here. You can see this for yourself that this isn’t exactly true if you have a Strong’s Concordance: check and compare Strongs Hebrew word number 136 (Adonai) and 3068 YHVH/Yehovah.

      Second, so Nehemia Gordon isn’t a believer. So what? Does this change truth? Truth is truth whether it’s coming from the lips of YHVH or from Balaam’s donkey!!!!! If your math teacher says that 2 +2 = 4, are we to disbelieve this because he’s a non-believer? If a weather forecaster says that it’s going to rain tomorrow, are we to disbelieve this because he’s not a believer? If the non-believing rabbinic Jews say that Passover or Pentecost is on a certain day because they have invented a calendar in the 4th century to which many people still adhere including believers in Yeshua, do we accept or reject that calendar based on the Jews’ spiritual orientation toward Yeshua? Or do we look at the evidence for its validity and accept and reject it based on empirical evidence? If the only OT manuscripts we have are those the Yeshua-denying Jews have faithfully copied down through the millennia and have passed on to us, do we reject these manuscripts because the scribes are non-believers? Do we reject what science tells us about chemistry, astronomy, physics, biology, or anything because they’re non-believers? If the mail man brings you mail that you don’t like, do you reject the mail because the mail man isn’t a believer? When you go to the doctor, do you first ask him for his statement of faith before patronizing him or her? Didn’t think so. So why do we put Nehemia Gordon in a special category that we don’t put anyone else? Not picking on anyone here. I’ve heard this false argument from many sources over the years. I’m not defending Gordon for his unbelief. He will have to answer to YHVH for his. (BTW, I watched my wife witness to him about Yeshua over dinner in a restaurant in Tiberious, Israel in the spring of 2008.)

      Bottom line: truth stands on its own as truth. If we reject truth, regardless of the messenger bringing us the truth, we will look like fools. I hope I’ve made my point.

      • Thanks Natan. I am just wary and like you say truth is truth and no, I haven’t watched the video but I know you check the posts too before you put them on. So I wasn’t attempting to undermine you. So sorry if that is the impression. I have done a lot of study but am still maturing and am not there yet, trying to be approved but have not read & do not know everything either so that is why I passed it by you. Sometimes we all get war weary and the rolling up of sleeves is in another hole. Points you have given are taken on board too. Shalom and sorry to be a bother. Be blessed. F J.

      • No bother whatsoever. And thank you for making yourself vulnerable and for giving me the opportunity to address some current misconceptions that many people have and that I’ve heard for years. This is no reflection on you personally. I merely take these occasions to address larger issues I see going on in our spiritual “movement.”

        From where I sit in my little converted chicken coop studio/office/studio/library/prayer room, I feel like I’m at a control center, watchman on the wall type of a place where info is flowing into me from all different sources from all over the world thanks to the internet. I hear and see a lot and endeavor, by YHVH’s grace, to bring the light of Scripture to bear on what I see going on around me. It’s about being salt and light and using the resources YHVH has given us to help expand his kingdom. I’m sort of a spiritual activist for YHVH’s kingdom. That’s all.

        Thanks for all of your contributions. They’re appreciated and help to make this blog a success. May YHVH be glorified!

      • Hi Natan

        this comment below is what applies to me & it was underneath one of the vids you linked. I have downloaded the vids and will do a bit of first hand looking with prayer.

        Blessings F J

        MyChele Marie1 year ago

        First of all I would like to say that it seems that our Creator gave us 2 eyes 2 ears and 1 mouth for a very good reason! Talk Less-Observe more+Listen more=Learning More! I am saying this in Love to the ones who are speaking so negatively about what Nehemia is saying. I watched this episode 3 times just to get a fuller understanding of it. I will probably watch it a few more times at a later date just as a refresher. I am really glad this was one of the subjects this evening because I was praying for understanding to this exact question and another question concerning the Creators calendar; Surprisingly, Michael Rood answers that later on in tonights teaching! YHVH is so awesome in leading me to the answers I am seeking!
        Thank you Nehemia & Michael for taking the time to go into the deeper things in the scriptures. So much answered and learned when going back & seeing the different translations from the original, how many letters in one language’s alphabet verses another, the difference in word pronunciations, spellings, definitions, & how meanings might varie because of the different languages and the culture or religious practices of that time period. Shalom to all & good night.

        Read more

      • Natan Lawrence , I appreciate your feedback, but scriptures do say that it does matter if “They don’t believe in Messiah ” the “Truth” is anyone that does not believe is the anti-messiah.

      • I’m not sure what you’re referring to in your response. I’ve never said that it doesn’t matter if a person doesn’t believe in the Messiah. The Scripture is clear that it does matter. It is sin not to believe in him and unbelief will condemn a person to eternal judgment and death in the lake of fire.

        As far as what the biblical definition is of Antichrist, I don’t throw the term around haphazardly. John in his first and second epistle clearly defines who fits this designation, and I go off of that.

  2. This argument is valid if these vowel points belong to this word. Remember they were put there by rabbinic Jews that forbade pronouncing the name. Older references give a different pronunciation. See videos below for historical proof of another pronunciation. [video link edited out]

    • With all due respect, I had to edit out the video links, since this blog has a long-standing policy of not posting video links unless the moderator (that’s me) has had a chance to watch them first. Generally, for me, this is a matter of time. Working a full-time secular job and with other life responsibilities, my time is limited and has to be allocated judiciously.

      Suffice it to say, the case for the pronunciation of YHVH as Yahweh, has already been made again and again by many people including scholars and non-scholars. We don’t need to go over this ground again. If someone wants to find this information, just Google it. This blog is disinclined to rehash the same arguments over and over again on an issue.

      The purpose for posting the current info on Yehovah being found in so many ancient manuscripts is that this is new information. The case for Yahweh is NOT new information. Aren’t the scholars who advocate the this pronunciation just repeating over and over again what has already been said on this subject? Are they actually presenting new evidence from ancient sources? Didn’t think so. This is something that Gordon is doing, however. He is a linguistic archeologist who is uncovering new evidence that challenges the conventional thinking on this issue.

      Look, evidence is evidence. Facts are facts. Truth is truth. We have two choices when confronted with facts: deal with it and grow into that truth, or deny it and stay where we are. It is for the last reason that so many people are stuck back in a tree of knowledge religious systems believing what they’ve wrongly been taught about the apostle Paul and the law, etc., etc. The restoration of truth is going on as Peter predicted in Acts 3:21, “Whom the heaven must receive until the times of restitution of all things, which God hath spoken by the mouth of all his holy prophets since the world began.” Some folks will move forward into that light of truth, others will stay where they are. I don’t judge them. That’s for YHVH to do. But when overwhelming evidence is presented on a subject, I have to get off the couch, roll up my sleeves and get to work proving or disproving it. Yeah, that’s hard work, but the rewards are worth it. I’ve learned that ignorance is never bliss. Ignorance is ignorance.

      Oh, by the way, were you able to watch the videos by Nehemia Gordon before posting the comment?

  3. I agree…it does not matter the belief of the person to point out the truth. Languages are designed in such a way that they are spoken, read, and written regardless of a person’s religious or faith beliefs, just as is math, science, etc. It does not matter if the person who is reading, writing, or speaking the language believes in Yeshua or not because the setup and facts around the manner that a language is designed are just that…facts. The fact that the person believes or does not believe has no bearing in the way the language is written. The vowel points are written to indicate how to pronounce the words, and as a former believer in the Name of Elohim being Yahweh, I can clearly see that it is not because the vowel points show otherwise. It is the same with learning any other language. I speak and write English, and am learning to speak and write in Spanish and Hebrew. The belief’s of my instructors in these languages don’t mean anything in context of the language the way that it is taught. Languages have rules, no matter who is teaching them, and to insinuate that the language is not being taught correctly because the person teaching it is not a believer in Yeshua is just asinine.The belief in Yeshua for salvation is a whole other ball game, but this is not what we are talking about.

  4. I meant to say that the fact that the person believes or does not believe has no bearing in the way the language is structured.

  5. According to Gordon, it is 100% sure, without any doubt whatsoever that the Name is Yehovah. Really? One needs to explain the occurrence of the Name with chireq under the waw. If the Name is really Yehovah, shouldn’t it have 100% of the time a qamats under the waw? Why is it that EVERY SINGLE TIME!!! that the Name יהוה has the chireq under the waw it is accompanied by the actual word אֳדֹנָי. Coincidental? According to tradition one is supposed to substitute the word Elohim when the Name is paired with the word Adonai. In all those cases, [this happens 306 times in the Hebrew text] 100% [really every single time] the vowel underneath the waw is a CHIREQ! Isn’t that interesting? Don’t believe me, if you have a bible program you can search on Strongs Number H3069 and it will give you every instance. Or if you have a fancy program like Accordance, Bible Works, or Logos you can search on strings of words as well. I personally checked every single time this occurs. A few times, notably, in the Leningrad Codex, the very first two times the yud even has a Chateph Seghol! Gen 15:2 “But Abram said, “O Lord God”” BHS: וַיֹּ֣אמֶר אַבְרָ֗ם אֲדֹנָ֤י יֱהוִה֙

    Gordon admits in his paper “The Pronunication of the Name” pg 9:
    Quote: “Another point worth noting is that in the Aleppo Codex, the most precise manuscript of the biblical text, the name YHVH gets the vowels Yehovih when it is iuxtaposed to the word Adonai [….]
    …Yehowih (sheva – cholam – chiriq). This seems to be a unique scribal practice which consists of changing a single vowel in order to remind the reader how to read the name YHVH”. End Quote.

    But it really is a reminder to use Elohim, not to read Yehowih. If the vowels really belonged with the Name are there multiple pronunciations of the Names of God?
    In essence he admits that the different vowels don’t have to be exact. They only need to be an indication of what circumlocution to use. So, it doesn’t matter that the vowels are not exactly the same. But people have their pet theories and will not be persuaded that their theory doesn’t hold up against the evidence.

    In essence I am arguing that you can’t use a 9th or 10th century CE document with a vowel system that was invented at that time, mind you, to figure out what the Name is.
    The codices show evidence that morphology and vowels used under prefixes are indications that the creators [Masoretes] wanted you to substitute a different word for the Name. See for example Ps 68:21. Only Elohim will change the vowel under the prefix to a tsere! This is one of the exceptions to the second rule of shewa. But here it happens exactly in the place where tradition says you should substitute “Elohim.”

    Why is it that in every single case that a personal name that starts with a Yud with vocal shewa, according to the first rule of shewa the inseparable prefix gets a chireq? But NEVER with the Name YHWH. It is always a patach according to the second rule of shewa – that is the rule that deals with words that start with Chateph vowels. Coincidental? I doubt it.

    Regarding the waw/vav issue:
    Most of his videos are set up to try to give the impression that he is a Hebrew scholar, but his expertise is in archaeology. Even having a master’s degree and now a PhD in Biblical studies and being fluent in Hebrew does not mean that you are a Hebrew Linguist. Just because I am fluent in English (even though it is my second language) does not make me an English scholar/linguist. Most Israelis do not know the rules of the vowel system for the simple reason that they do not need them. Unlike English, Hebrew vowel patterns mean something. But most Israelis could not tell you for example what the first or second rule of Shewa is.
    In his videos you can actually see that Gordon has Modern Hebrew grammar in mind and not Biblical Hebrew. For example he calls a participle a present tense. Biblical Hebrew does not have a present tense. It has no tenses at all. I mean verb forms that indicate time. The verb forms indicate whether the action of the verb is ongoing or finished. Context tells you when it happened.

    Arguing from 18th century speech and even 6th century CE documents doesn’t negate the linguistic evidence that in pre-Biblical and Mosaic time the waw was pronounced as a w.
    There is evidence all over the weak paradigms that shows that yuds and waws interchange. Take for example III-he verbs. Most verbs were originally III-yud or III-waw verbs. But they dropped out and the he is really a matres lexionis.
    Almost all I-י [first radical of the root is a yud] verbs were originally I-ו [first radical of the root is a waw] verbs. One of the reasons is that the waw is, just like the yud, a semi-vocalic consonant – a consonant with vowel properties. Both the yud and waw behave the same. This is one of the proofs that originally the “vav” in Biblical times was pronounced as a “w” sound because the v sound is not semi-vocalic and would not behave the same way.

    • So what is your background as a Hebrew linguist and scholar? You offer some ostensibly valid critiques, but what better solutions do you have on how to pronounce YHVH based on the best evidence we have to date?

      It’s easy to criticize someone else, but it does not serve to advance the restoration of Truth without also providing better solutions and at higher a level of truth based on newer and better data.

      Anyone can tear down, but constructing something better in its place takes a lot more effort, and sadly, so far, you have failed the test.

      • First, you understand that you are actually not bringing any proof that anything of what I said is wrong?
        I have studied Hebrew and Greek grammar for quite awhile. I can give you references regarding the rules of shewa of several grammars if you like.
        I can also give you even my Excel spreadsheet with the actual data to proof what I am saying. [you have my email]
        I tabulated every single different form of YHWH with bible references where you can find the form and the number of occurrences for each form [I have a little OCD]. There is a very clear pattern that goes on which is totally ignored by N. Gordon.
        I as well tabulated all occurrences of names that start with a Yud with vocal shewa in the Bible with verse examples to proof that they all follow the proper rule, but the Name does not – ever!

        Secondly, you are basically trying to argue that my criticism is not valid because I didn’t give a better solution. Pardon me, but that is just rubbish.
        If you for example tell me that water boils at 50 degrees Celsius and I give you evidence that water at room temperature and normally atmospheric pressure does NOT boil at 50 degrees without giving you proof that it normally boils at 100 degrees, would I be wrong? Of course not.

        I in fact said that all that I wanted to proof is that you cannot use a 9th or 10th century CE document to proof how a word is pronounced in 14th century BCE. Just look at the different dialects in English and you will see that vowels are differently pronounced in Scotland, England, Canada, Australia, USA -south and north – and you will see that it is impossible to be 100% correct.

        I just didn’t mention a solution because actual scholars have been saying for ages that the most plausible form is Yahweh. Gordon says that this is a wild guess. He does this by reinterpreting one article in the Anchor Yale Bible that says that Yahweh is a scholarly guess. Sorry, but this is slandering scholars. It is verbal trickery. Scholarly guess means something in scholarly literature. It means that based on the available data, which is not always conclusive, the most likely pronunciation is Yahweh. That is NOT a wild guess.

        There is a very good reason why scholars say that it most likely is יַהְוֶה [Yahweh].
        HaShem first introduces his Name as אֶהְיֶה [ʾehyeh]. This is the first person singular imperfect Qal form of the verb היה [hyh]. His Name is an expression about himself. [Something like: I AM]. HaShem said to Moses, “My Name is ‘I am the existing One’.” He then explains it what that means.
        Then he says to Moses to tell Israel that his Name is YHWH. It starts with a yud. So, if his Name is a verb, the yud indicates 3rd person. We know from diachronic linguistics that Yuds and Waws interchange. HWH is probably just an older form, but it means the same thing. So in effect he tells Moses to say: “‘The One who is’ sent me to you”.

        I am astonished that Nehemiah dares to say that Yahweh would be unrecognizable to a Jew that speaks Hebrew. He says that because it doesn’t occur, therefore it is unrecognizable. Totally wrong. Hebrew grew exponentially in our modern time because they could take root letters and apply the paradigms that are normally used for that language. That is not the same with English.
        Verb forms in Hebrew have very specific vowel patterns. Look into the back of any grammar book. That is usually where they have the paradigms. The e-o-a pattern is NOT a recognizable vowel pattern. On the other hand the A-E is an actual pattern. It is a very consistent pattern in Modern and Biblical Hebrew of the imperfect form of III-He Verbs. The paradigm for III-He verbs is גלה [GLH]. Adding the yud, the 3rd masculine singular Hiphil form is יַגְלֶה [YGLH] – pronounced yagleh.
        Yahweh in Modern and Biblical Hebrew would be the 3rd masculine singular Hiphil Yiqtol [imperfect] form of a III-He verb with the consonants HWH. (“He causes to become” or “He will cause to become”).
        But because of linguistics studies scholars now believe that pre-biblical times the chireq of the 3rd masculine singular Qal form would have been originally a patach. Therefore the current Yiyeh [using היה HYH] would have been Yayeh. And using הוה HWH, it would be Yahweh. This is following normal rules using normal paradigms. No trickery, and no wild guesses.

        One thing I have to say: Not me, but Nehemiah Gordon says in a video that one has to repent of saying the Name wrong, now that one knows it is Yehovah one has to repent. He is the one making it an issue of faith. Not me. He is the one who tears down people because they say Yahweh.

      • And the debate rages on between “scholars” and scholars.

        The vast majority (if not all) of those reading this blog haven’t got a clue what you just said. At least NG explains his position in a way that the rest of us can understand and then, right or wrong, shows us what he believes to be convincing proof for his position from Scripture, as well as from ancient documents and hundreds if not thousands of ancient Hebrew mss and other extra-biblical and scholarly sources. Plus, I like the fact that NG is fluent in Hebrew. If I’m going to have someone work on my car engine, I’d prefer an expert, professional, hands-on mechanic to do the work rather than someone who has merely read a book about auto mechanics with no practical experience.

        Sounds like we need to put you and NG in a boxing ring and let you two duke it out. I not a fan of boxing, but I’d enjoy watching this match.

        That said, I have graciously and generously given you your say. This discussion is now closed.

        Be blessed.

    • This is precisely the point I was trying to make years ago. The “Yehovah” pronunciation is obviously a false one made up of consonants and vowel pointing that were only there to help the reader either pronounce the name as adonai, or elohim. Scholars and authorities all agree on this, and in the beginning of many printed Jewish sacred texts they state this in the preface.

      • It always amazes me how people who have no linguistic training, no academic credentials, who cannot speak the language in question and who can barely read it with understanding, and who cannot even site sources for what they believe are so quick to criticize those who do have some expertise in these areas.

        Look guys, if we’re going to have an honest intellectual debate, let’s at least have a true debate about these issue citing sources, carefully and objectively analyzing both sides of the issue instead to just taking bigoted pot shots at others. Eventually, it becomes a grudge match or, to put it crassly, a pissing match of small and narrow-minded people who have little or no expertise or deep knowledge on the subjects they are talking about.

        You are not going to find me pawning myself off as some sort of a expert in Hebrew, the vowel points or Hebrew linguistics because I am not. However in an attempt to discover truth, I will quote people who are experts on these subjects, and, yes, even the experts disagree among themselves. So what do we make of this? I guess we’ll have to agree without being disagreeable.

  6. Well excuse me; I thought this was a discussion on the merits of “Yehovah” being considered as a valid pronunciation of the tetragrammaton. Debasing the debate to ad hominin attacks just wastes all of our time. Sad

    • Brother, in my comments I am simply asking valid questions about the legitimacy of the criticism and the qualifications of those making the critiques. It seems that my comments tweaked one’s ego just a tad.

      You may refer to my comments as an ad hominem (please note the spelling—it’s not spelled ad hominin) attack if you want and if it makes you feel better. But in fact, by definition of ad hominem, it could be thought that you are doing the same in reverse by accusing me of “debasing the debate.” But I digress. Frankly, there was no debate offered by you…just opinions. That’s not really an intellectually and logically-based debate is it? When scholars debate and conduct peer-reviewed studies, don’t they offer fact-based counterpoints and not just their personal opinions?

      Next, as for the vowel points, without them how would we even know how to pronounce any Hebrew words at all? Were we to be forced to view the Hebrew consonants sans vowel points, wouldn’t we be simply guessing what the vowels were? Wouldn’t that engender much confusion with every man doing what’s right in his own eyes? At least the vowel points give us something to go by rather than having to rely on a bunch of guess work and disparate opinions. So isn’t to criticize the Masoretes invention of the vowel pointing system actually ignoring the great blessing they bequeathed to future generations, so that Hebrew pronunciation would not be lost forever? Without the niqqud system, doesn’t Hebrew as a spoken language totally fall apart? Therefore doesn’t it follow logically that if one is going to question the Masoretes’ vowel pointing of YHVH, then maybe we should question the entire system and how every other Hebrew word is vowel pointed as well? I’m not an expert on this and neither are you, but these are valid questions that I’d like to hear an expert or experts address.

      Finally, I have heard NG admit, and I agree with him, that based on the best data we have to date, his pronunciation of YHVH seems to be the closest thing we have to the real pronunciation of YHVH based not only on the vowel pointing, but also based on Hebrew grammar rules as well as based on the analysis of theorphoric biblical names. I have read all of his papers and watched his videos where he discusses the linguistic technicalities of these issues. He has put out more information than anyone else that I know of to date. In this regard, another linguistic scholar has stepped into the ring on this debate that in the interest of truth you might want to investigate. It is Dr. Miles R. Jones of Texas. He is a linguist, educator and archeological researcher who. Dr. Jones, along with a team of linguistic experts in Hebrew, is translating portions of the NT Scriptures from ancient Hebrew sources into English. He has written three books on these subjects including the pronunciation of YHVH, which I own and have read. So as you see, Joe, I am trying to keep up with the latest expert info and data on these subjects in the interest of seeking truth. If I can find similar experts who can provide more evidence that that YHVH is pronounced as Yahweh, then I will dig into this info. So far, from the other side, all we have is old news. No one that I know of is addressing the new data that is coming out.

      Now you may or may not agree with these latest findings by these linguistic experts, and that is fine, but to my thinking, based on the best evidence we have to date from actually ancient Jewish (not Christian or pagan) sources, Yehovah is the closest thing we have to the actual pronunciation.

      On another point. And please don’t forget this: Paul said of the Jewish people, “unto them were committed the oracles of Elohim,” (Rom 3:2). Does this not mean anything at all? Was not YHVH capable of preserving the Hebrew Scriptures through the Jews upon which all Bibles in all other languages are based, or did he fall down on his job and Paul is a liar? Are you telling me that we can trust the Hebrew Scriptures that the Jews preserved for us to this day, but we can’t trust them on the one point regarding how to pronounce YHVH as well as their niqqud system?

      My friend, these are legitimate questions that need to be addressed by learned and knowledge people. You and I are blessed to have a certainly level, perhaps even a high level of biblical understanding, but let’s be honest, when it comes to the deep dive into the linguistics, you and I are in the peanut gallery. I hope you don’t take this as an ad hominem attack as well. If so, that’s ludicrous, for I’m “attacking” myself too. I call this transparency and honesty, not ad hominemism.

      Finally, thank you for your comments, for they give me the opportunity to address these issues, so that others who have questions along these lines can hear both sides of the arguments. This allows the strengths and weaknesses of opposing viewpoints to be exposed so that other readers can make up their minds one way or the other.

      May Yehovah bless you and yours!

Share your thoughts...