THE LANGUAGE OF GOD (Good Lecture)

[Koichos]

Oh, so you don’t believe there’s some hidden/secret meaning in the text of the Torah at all?

I don't remember saying that.

I’m not saying there needs to be anything like that to “prove God is real” or make the Bible seem like a “miraculous book” (like Muslims would claim about the Quran) but Hebrew language is interesting

I know @MMS knows a little about gematria but that’s another topic

As fascinating as it may be, gimaṭr'ya cannot be used to 'prove' anything. It is just a device used at the deeper levels of Jewish exegesis.

 

[MMS]

I don't remember saying that.


As fascinating as it may be, gimaṭr'ya cannot be used to 'prove' anything. It is just a device used at the deeper levels of Jewish exegesis.

i can confirm this

however, the odd thing that arose in the other thread that I can't rule out. Is the interaction of gematrias between different languages but share the same numeric pattern

it would be an odd union

 

[Koichos]

i can confirm this

however, the odd thing that arose in the other thread that I can't rule out. Is the interaction of gematrias between different languages but share the same numeric pattern

it would be an odd union

There may be similar systems in other languages, but gimaṭr'ya applies only to the Hebrew alphabet.

 

[MMS]

There may be similar systems in other languages, but gimaṭr'ya applies only to the Hebrew alphabet.

what about "within" hebrew or rather the immediate parents and offshoots of the language say like Aramaic or Arabic

 

[DoubleClutch]

I don't remember saying that.


As fascinating as it may be, gimaṭr'ya cannot be used to 'prove' anything. It is just a device used at the deeper levels of Jewish exegesis.

By Jewish exegesis do you mean Jewish “mysticism”?

Is it basically used for those who are looking for a deeper hidden meaning or to unlock extra “special” knowledge?

It’s like people want to “prove” the text itself is the proof instead of the “word” being the evidence God is real.

 

[MMS]

By Jewish exegesis do you mean Jewish “mysticism”?

Is it basically used for those who are looking for a deeper hidden meaning or to unlock extra “special” knowledge?

It’s like people want to “prove” the text itself is the proof instead of the “word” being the evidence God is real.

as far as i know exegesis is like a term meaning the same thing as "extended commentary"

the talmud for example is an extended commentary on the tanakh but not a substitute for it

 

[DoubleClutch]

as far as i know exegesis is like a term meaning the same thing as "extended commentary"

the talmud for example is an extended commentary on the tanakh but not a substitute for it

So basically Jewish “hadiths”

 

[MMS]

So basically Jewish “hadiths”

somewhat

but the commentaries come from "peer reviewed" rabbis if you will

alot of what people disagree with Jews about really comes from the commentaries rather than the Tanakh itself. Because the ideas in the talmud frame their perspective, so from the outside looking in, it looks like they follow the talmud

Exodus 24:10 Hebrew Text Analysis

 

[Koichos]

what about "within" hebrew

As far as... its significance? Numerous minhagim (customs) have resulted from the use of gimaṭr'ya.

or rather the immediate parents and offshoots of the language say like Aramaic or Arabic

Aramaic is written (by Jews) in Hebrew characters. And, if I am not mistaken, Arabic does have a numerical system for their alphabet.

 

[Koichos]

By Jewish exegesis

In Judaism we have thirteen clearly defined exegetical rules according to which the Tοrah is interpreted and these are considered so important that they were incorporated into the formal Jewish prayer-liturgy so that every Jew should be able to recite them by heart:

do you mean Jewish “mysticism”?

Not necessarily, no. Gimaṭr'ya in particular, yes; but it is not applied to the literal text, so it never affects the actual meaning of any verse.

Is it basically used for those who are looking for a deeper hidden meaning or to unlock extra “special” knowledge?

It is a kind of mid'rash, basically a derived 'flight of fancy' intended to teach some supplementary message.

It’s like people want to “prove” the text itself is the proof instead of the “word” being the evidence God is real.

Again, it is not meant to 'prove' anything.

 

[DoubleClutch]

See how simple he breaks it down @MMS

The “language of God” = the “word”

What is the greek “logos” equivalent in Hebrew? @Koichos?

 

[Koichos]

See how simple he breaks it down @MMS

The “language of God” = the “word”

What is the greek “logos” equivalent in Hebrew? @Koichos?

Hebrew does not have any equivalent.

 

[DoubleClutch]

Hebrew does not have any equivalent.

What is the Hebrew word for “thought”?

Is the “logos” part of a concept borrowed from Greek philosophy?

Didn’t it exist at the time of 2nd temple Judaism?

 

[Koichos]

What is the Hebrew word for “thought”?

מחשבה
​

Is the “logos” part of a concept borrowed from Greek philosophy?

The concept is Greek and it only works as such; if you try to write it in Hebrew it just makes nonsense.

בְְּרֵֵאשִִׁית הָָָָיָָָָה הַַדָָָָּבָָָָר וְְהַַדָָָָּבָָָָר הָָָָיָָָָה אֵֵת הָָָָאֱֱֱֱלֺֺהִִים וֵֵאלֺֺהִִים הָָָָיָָָָה הַַדָָָָּבָָָָר׃​

At the beginning of was the thing and the thing was with the God and God was the thing. (B'sοrah 'al pi Yοħanan 1:1, Delitzsch)

---

בְְּרֵֵאשִִׁית הָָָָיָָָָה הַַדָָָָּבָָָָר וְְהַַדָָָָּבָָָָר הָָָָיָָָָה אֶֶֶֶת־הָָָָאֱֱֱֱלֺֺהִִים וְְהוּא הַַדָָָָּבָָָָר הָָָָיָָָָה אֱֱֱֱלֺֺהִִים׃​

At the beginning of was the thing and the thing was with the God and that thing was a god. (B'sοrah 'al pi Yοħanan 1:1, Salkinson)

Didn’t it exist at the time of 2nd temple Judaism?

What difference does it make?

 

[DoubleClutch]

מחשבה
​

The concept is Greek and it only works as such; if you try to write it in Hebrew it just makes nonsense.



What difference does it make?

Well, considering how the earliest Christians were Jews. Maybe the concept had already been adapted to Judaism or translated to make sense to them in Greek. Remember Jewish people had already been exiled and was already influenced by other cultures.

But regardless, the “word of God” is a Jewish creation. Maybe not unlike how the “angel of the lord” is to be understanding.

Also I think the translation is more close to:

“Machshava”