The Little Known Biblical Curse of Egypt by Isaiah

[MMS]

building on the last post

Levite's concubine

A Levite from the mountains of Ephraim had a concubine, who left him and returned to the house of her father in Bethlehem in Judah.[1] Heidi M. Szpek observes that this story serves to support the institution of monarchy, and the choice of the locations of Ephraim (the ancestral home of Samuel, who anointed the first king) and Bethlehem, (the home of King David), are not accidental.[2]

According to the King James Version and the New International Version, the concubine was unfaithful to the Levite; according to a note in the Septuagint[3] and in the New Living Translation she was "angry" with him.[4] Rabbinical interpretations say that the woman was both fearful and angry with her husband and left because he was selfish, putting his comfort before his wife and their relationship,[5] and the Cambridge Bible for Schools and Colleges argues that the translation as 'angry' "suits the context, which implies a quarrel, but not unfaithfulness, on the woman’s part".[3] The Levite travelled to Bethlehem to retrieve her, and for five days her father managed to persuade him to delay their departure. On the fifth day, the Levite declined to postpone their journey any longer, and they set out late in the day.
The Levite attempts to find lodging in Gibeah – by Charles Joseph Staniland, circa 1900


As they approached Jebus (Jerusalem), the servant suggested they stop for the night, but the Levite refused to stay in a Jebusite city, and they continued on to Gibeah. J. P. Fokkelman argues that Judges 19:11–14 is a chiasm, which hinges on the Levite referring to Jebus as "a town of aliens who are not of Israel." In doing this, the narrator is hinting at the "selfishness and rancid group egotism" of the Levite. Yet, it is not the "aliens" of Jebus who commit a heinous crime, but Benjaminites in Gibeah.[6]

They arrived in Gibeah just at nightfall. The Levite and his party waited in the public square, but no one offered the customary hospitality. Eventually, an old man came in from working in the field and inquired as to their situation. He, too was from the mountains of Ephraim, but had lived among the Benjaminites for some time. He invited them to spend the night at his house rather than the open square. He brought him into his house, and gave fodder to the donkeys; they washed their feet, and ate and drank.[7]
The Israelite discovers his concubine, dead on his doorstep – by Gustave Doré, Circa 1880


Suddenly certain men of the city surrounded the house and beat on the door. They spoke to the master of the house, the old man, saying, "Bring out the man who came to your house, that we may know him." "To know" is probably a euphemism for sexual intercourse here, as in other biblical texts and as the NRSV translates it.[8]

The Ephraimite host offered instead his own maiden daughter and the Levite's concubine. Ken Stone observes, "Apparently the sexual violation of women was considered less shameful than that of men, at least in the eyes of other men. Such an attitude reflects both the social subordination of women and the fact that homosexual rape was viewed as a particularly severe attack on male honor."[8]

When the men would not be dissuaded, the Levite thrust the concubine out the door. They abused her all night, not letting her go until dawn, when she collapsed outside the door, where the Levite found her the next morning. Finding her unresponsive, he placed her on a donkey and continued his journey home. The account does not state when or where the woman died.[8] Upon his return, he carved up her body into twelve pieces which he sent to all the Israelite tribes, demanding revenge.[9]

The war against Benjamin[edit]

Outraged, the confederated tribes mobilized to demand justice and gathered a combined force of about 400,000 confederated Israelites at Mizpah. They sent men through all the tribe of Benjamin, demanding that they deliver up the men who committed the crime to be executed, but the Benjaminites refused and decided to go to war to defend the men of Gibeah instead. They gathered a rebel Benjaminite force of 26,000 to defend Gibeah. According to Judges 20:16, among all these soldiers there were seven hundred select troops who were left-handed, each of whom could sling a stone at a hair and not miss. When the Tribe of Benjamin refused to surrender the guilty parties, the rest of the tribes marched on Gibeah.[9]

On the first day of battle the confederated Israelite tribes suffered heavy losses. On the second day Benjamin went out against them from Gibeah and cut down thousands of the confederated Israelite swordsmen.[9]

Then the confederated Israelites went up to the house of God. They sat there before the Lord and fasted that day until evening; and they offered burnt offerings and peace offerings before the Lord. (The ark of the covenant of God was there in those days, and Phinehas the son of Eleazar, the son of Aaron, stood before it.) And the Lord said, "Go up, for tomorrow I will deliver them into your hand."[10]

On the third day the confederated Israelites set men in ambush all around Gibeah. They formed into formation as before and the rebelling Benjaminites went out to meet them. The rebelling Benjaminites killed about thirty in the highways and in the field, anticipating another victory where unaware of the trap that had been set as the confederated Israelites appeared to retreat and the Benjaminites were drawn away from the city to the highways in pursuit, one of which goes up to Bethel and the other to Gibeah. Those besieging the city sent up a great cloud of smoke as a signal, and the Israelite main force wheeled around to attack. When the Benjaminites saw their city in flames, and that the retreat had been a ruse, they panicked and routed toward the desert, pursued by the confederated Israelites. About 600 survived the onslaught and made for the more defensible rock of Rimmon where they remained for four months. The Israelites withdrew through the territory off Benjamin, destroying every city they came to, killing every inhabitant and all the livestock.[11]

Finding new wives[edit]

According to the Hebrew Bible, the men of Israel had sworn an oath at Mizpah, saying, "None of us shall give his daughter to Benjamin as a wife."[12]

Then the people came to the house of God, and remained there before God till evening. They lifted up their voices and wept bitterly, and said, "O Lord God of Israel, why has this come to pass in Israel, that today there should be one tribe missing in Israel?"[12]

So it was, on the next morning, that the people rose early and built an altar there, and offered burnt offerings and peace offerings. The children of Israel said, "Who is there among all the tribes of Israel who did not come up with the assembly to the Lord?" For they had made a great oath concerning anyone who had not come up to the Lord at Mizpah, saying, "He shall surely be put to death." And the children of Israel grieved for Benjamin their brother, and said, "One tribe is cut off from Israel today. What shall we do for wives for those who remain, seeing we have sworn by the Lord that we will not give them our daughters as wives?" And they said, "What one is there from the tribes of Israel who did not come up to Mizpah to the Lord?" And, in fact, no one had come to the camp from Jabesh Gilead to the assembly. For when the people were counted, indeed, not one of the inhabitants of Jabesh Gilead was there. So the congregation sent out there twelve thousand of their most valiant men, and commanded them, saying, "Go and strike the inhabitants of Jabesh Gilead with the edge of the sword, including the women and children. And this is the thing that you shall do: You shall utterly destroy every male, and every woman who has known a man intimately." So they found among the inhabitants of Jabesh Gilead four hundred young virgins who had not known a man intimately; and they brought them to the camp at Shiloh, which is in the land of Canaan. Then the whole congregation sent word to the children of Benjamin who were at the rock of Rimmon, and announced peace to them. So Benjamin came back at that time, and they gave them the women whom they had saved alive of the women of Jabesh Gilead; and yet they had not found enough for them. And the people grieved for Benjamin, because the Lord had made a void in the tribes of Israel.[12]


Then the elders of the congregation said, "What shall we do for wives for those who remain, since the women of Benjamin have been destroyed?" And they said, "There must be an inheritance for the survivors of Benjamin, that a tribe may not be destroyed from Israel. However, we cannot give them wives from our daughters, for the children of Israel have sworn an oath, saying, 'Cursed be the one who gives a wife to Benjamin.'" Then they said, "In fact, there is a yearly feast of the Lord in Shiloh, which is north of Bethel, on the east side of the highway that goes up from Bethel to Shechem, and south of Lebonah." Therefore, they instructed the children of Benjamin, saying, "Go, lie in wait in the vineyards, and watch; and just when the daughters of Shiloh come out to perform their dances, then come out from the vineyards, and every man catch a wife for himself from the daughters of Shiloh; then go to the land of Benjamin. Then it shall be, when their fathers or their brothers come to us to complain, that we will say to them, 'Be kind to them for our sakes, because we did not take a wife for any of them in the war; for it is not as though you have given the women to them at this time, making yourselves guilty of your oath.'" And the children of Benjamin did so (on Tu B'Av); they took enough wives for their number from those who danced, whom they caught. Then they went and returned to their inheritance, and they rebuilt the cities and dwelt in them. So the children of Israel departed from there at that time, every man to his tribe and family; they went out from there, every man to his inheritance.[12]

According to the Book of Judges 20:15–18, the strength of the armies numbered 26,000 men on the Benjamin side (of whom only 700 from Gibeah), and 400,000 men on the other side.[13]

my first thought is how this is an allegory to Lot in Genesis cant help but notice the manner in which the israelites feuded and warred with eachother matches descriptions of Gog and Magog.

Levites Concubine is an allegory to God being treated as a harlot at the hand of the Benjaminites of Gibeah

 

[MMS]

^^^^^

peep these two passages from Genesis

Genesis 12:11-20

11 And it came to pass, when he was come near to enter into Egypt, that he said unto Sarai his wife, Behold now, I know that thou art a fair woman to look upon:

12 Therefore it shall come to pass, when the Egyptians shall see thee, that they shall say, This is his wife: and they will kill me, but they will save thee alive.

13 Say, I pray thee, thou art my sister: that it may be well with me for thy sake; and my soul shall live because of thee.

14 And it came to pass, that, when Abram was come into Egypt, the Egyptians beheld the woman that she was very fair.

15 The princes also of Pharaoh saw her, and commended her before Pharaoh: and the woman was taken into Pharaoh's house.

16 And he entreated Abram well for her sake: and he had sheep, and oxen, and he asses, and menservants, and maidservants, and she asses, and camels.

17 And the Lord plagued Pharaoh and his house with great plagues because of Sarai Abram's wife.

18 And Pharaoh called Abram and said, What is this that thou hast done unto me? why didst thou not tell me that she was thy wife?

19 Why saidst thou, She is my sister? so I might have taken her to me to wife: now therefore behold thy wife, take her, and go thy way.

20 And Pharaoh commanded his men concerning him: and they sent him away, and his wife, and all that he had.

^^^also an allegory to Exodus

Genesis 19:1-13

1 And there came two angels to Sodom at even; and Lot sat in the gate of Sodom: and Lot seeing them rose up to meet them; and he bowed himself with his face toward the ground;

2 And he said, Behold now, my lords, turn in, I pray you, into your servant's house, and tarry all night, and wash your feet, and ye shall rise up early, and go on your ways. And they said, Nay; but we will abide in the street all night.

3 And he pressed upon them greatly; and they turned in unto him, and entered into his house; and he made them a feast, and did bake unleavened bread, and they did eat.

4 But before they lay down, the men of the city, even the men of Sodom, compassed the house round, both old and young, all the people from every quarter:

5 And they called unto Lot, and said unto him, Where are the men which came in to thee this night? bring them out unto us, that we may know them.

6 And Lot went out at the door unto them, and shut the door after him,

7 And said, I pray you, brethren, do not so wickedly.

8 Behold now, I have two daughters which have not known man; let me, I pray you, bring them out unto you, and do ye to them as is good in your eyes: only unto these men do nothing; for therefore came they under the shadow of my roof.

9 And they said, Stand back. And they said again, This one fellow came in to sojourn, and he will needs be a judge: now will we deal worse with thee, than with them. And they pressed sore upon the man, even Lot, and came near to break the door.

10 But the men put forth their hand, and pulled Lot into the house to them, and shut to the door.

11 And they smote the men that were at the door of the house with blindness, both small and great: so that they wearied themselves to find the door.

12 And the men said unto Lot, Hast thou here any besides? son in law, and thy sons, and thy daughters, and whatsoever thou hast in the city, bring them out of this place:

13 For we will destroy this place, because the cry of them is waxen great before the face of the Lord; and the Lord hath sent us to destroy it.

Cant tell me that its not a clear as day allegory

the question is what does it have to do with Moonlight

 

[Dave24]

Subbed

 

[MMS]

Shalim and Shahar

Shalim - Wikipedia

A Ugaritic myth known as The Gracious and Most Beautiful Gods, describes Shalim and his brother Shahar as offspring of El through two women he meets at the seashore. They are both nursed by "The Lady", likely Anat (Athirat or Asherah), and have appetites as large as "(one) lip to the earth and (one) lip to the heaven." In other Ugaritic texts, the two are associated with the sun goddess.[1]

Another inscription is a sentence repeated three times in a para-mythological text, "Let me invoke the gracious gods, the voracious gods of ym." Ym in most Semitic languages means "day," and Shalim and Shahar, twin deities of the dusk and dawn, were conceived of as its beginning and end.[5]

Shalim is also mentioned separately in the Ugaritic god lists and forms of his name also appear in personal names, perhaps as a divine name or epithet.[1]

Many scholars believe that the name of Shalim is preserved in the name of the city Jerusalem.[1][6][7][8] The god Shalim may have been associated with dusk and the evening star in the etymological senses of a "completion" of the day, "sunset" and "peace".[9]

Shahar (god) - Wikipedia

Isaiah 14:12–15 has been the origin of the belief that Satan was a fallen angel, who could also be referred to as Lucifer.[2] It refers to the rise and disappearance of the morning star Venus in the phrase "O light-bringer, son of the dawn." (Helel ben Shaḥar, translated as Lucifer in the Vulgate and preserved in the early English translations of the Bible.)[2] This understanding of Isaiah 14:12–15 seems to be the most accepted interpretation in the New Testament, as well as among early Christians such as Origen, Eusebius, Tertullian, and Gregory the Great.[2] It may be considered a Christian "remythologization" of Isaiah 14, as the verse originally used Canaanite mythology to build its imagery of the hubris of a historical ruler, "the king of Babylon" in Isaiah 14:4.[2] It is likely that the role of Venus as the morning star was taken by Athtar, in this instance referred to as the son of Shahar.[3] The reference to Shahar remains enigmatic to scholars, who have a wide range of theories on the mythological framework and sources for the passage in Isaiah.[4]

 

[Koichos]

The Hebrew word שַֽׁחַר shaḥar [accent penultimate] (pausal form שָֽׁחַר shoḥar, as in: הֵילֵֽל בֶּֽן־שָֽׁחַר haylél bĕn-shoḥar) means 'dawn' or, more generally, 'morning'. There is not a single instance in Tenach where שַֽׁחַר shaḥar is the name of any 'god'; and the terms הֵילֵֽל haylél and בֶּֽן־שָֽׁחַר bĕn-shoḥar occur only at Y'shayohu 14:12. More to the point: R' Shimʿon bar Yoḥai, student of R' ʿAkiva and author of the holy Zohar (an esoteric commentary on the Torah, with an emphasis on mystical and spiritual matters), links the Aramaic קַדְרוּתָֽא דְּצַפְרָֽא kadhrutho d'ṣaf'ro (Ar. 'starless morning somber') with the Biblical phrase אַיֶּֽלֶת הַשַֽׁחַר ʾayyalath ha-shaḥar (Heb. 'doe of the dawn') in T'hilim 22:1, a poetic synonym for the planet Venus; allegorically, the connection here is that of Jewish suffering, a juxtaposition between moments of darkness and oppression followed by moments of light and redemption—the most intense and concealing period directly preceding the dawning of light. Accordingly, שַֽׁחַר shaḥar ('dawn') is related to the word שָׁחֹֽר shoḥor ('black'), for the moment that directly precedes the break of dawn is the darkest moment of the night; the starless, morning gloom—the deep blackness from which daylight emerges. (Note: the חוֹלָֽם ḥolom [וֹ] can be written 'defectively', that is without the ו vov, as in Vayikro 13:31 and also in 13:37 where we find the word שָׁחֹֽר shoḥor [in which case it is called חוֹלָֽם חָסֵֽר ḥolom ḥosér or 'defective ḥolom'], albeit in modern Hebrew it is often written with the ו vov [שָׁחֽוֹר] and this is known as חוֹלָֽם מָלֵֽא ḥolom molé or 'full ḥolom'; the two forms are used more-or-less interchangeably.)

Shalim and Shahar

Shalim - Wikipedia

The primitive meaning of the word אֵֽל él is power (not to be confused with אֶֽל ĕl, one form of the preposition to); it occurs in B'raishis 31:29 (for example) in the phrase יֶשׁ לְאֵֽל יָדִֽי yesh l'él yodi "it is in my hand's power" (see also D'vorim 28:32, Michoh 2:1, Mishlei 3:27, N'chemyoh 5:5).

Shahar (god) - Wikipedia

The word 'lucifer' may very well be a legitimate Latin translation of הֵילֵֽל haylél but הֵילֵֽל haylél has no connection whatsoever with the character whom xians call 'lucifer'; הֵילֵֽל haylél is but an old Hebrew name for the so-called 'morning star', the planet Venus (no relation to the Romans' pagan goddess of love and beauty, identified with the Greek 'Aphrodite'). Besides, שָׂטָֽן soton/satan in the Hebrew Scriptures is not a personal name but a title of a role—there is not and has never been an entity named 'שָׂטָֽן'—and neither the noun שָׂטָֽן soton ('hinderer') nor the title הַשָּׂטָֽן hasoton ('the hinderer') occurs even once in the book Y'shayohu. A שָׂטָֽן soton is an opponent (opposer), an adversary, an accuser; the root of the word is the infinitive לִשְׂטֹֽן (ḥolom ḥosér) or לִשְׂטֽוֹן (ḥolom molé) liss'ton, which means 'to attack', 'to be hostile [to]', 'to hinder' (in post-exilic Hebrew this word was spelled with ס sammech instead of שׂ sin: לִסְטֹֽן [ḥolom ḥosér] or לִסְטֽוֹן [ḥolom molé] liss'ton). The book Iyyov makes it abundantly clear that הַשָּׂטָֽן is Hashem's servant, and does not have free will of its own.

The term הֵילֵֽל haylél was an ancient Hebrew name used exclusively for the astronomical phenomenon of the planet Venus in its aspect as a morning object, outshining every other star and planet (only the moon and, of course, the sun are brighter). The ancient Jews called this point of light, as it shines in the eastern sky before sunrise, הֵילֵֽל בֶּֽן־שָֽׁחַר haylél bĕn-shoḥar or "Venus, [the] Morning Star".

הֵילֵֽל haylél is explained by Rash"i as follows:

"...הֵילֵל בֶּן־שָׁחַר: "כּוֹכָב הַנֹּגַהּ הַמֵאִיר אוֹר כְּכּוֹכָב הַבּוֹקֶר
​

"Venus, which gives light as the 'morning star'..." [The grammatical note regarding הֵילֵֽל as derived from the root verb י.ה.ל—`to shed light', as in יָהֵֽל yohél in Iyyov 31:26—is lacking in my Hebrew copy of Rash"i.]

And here is what Y'shayohu 14:12-15 actually says:

:אֵיךְ נָפַלְתָּ מִשָּׁמַיִם הֵילֵל בֶּן שָׁחַר נִגְדַּעְתָּ לָאָרֶץ חוֹלֵשׁ עַל גּוֹיִם: וְאַתָּה אָמַרְתָּ בִלְבָבְךָ הַשָּׁמַיִם אֶעֱלֶה מִמַּעַל לְכוֹכְבֵי אֵל אָרִים כִּסְאִי וְאֵשֵׁב בְּהַר מוֹעֵד בְּיַרְכְּתֵי צָפוֹן: אֶעֱלֶה עַל בָּמֳתֵי עָב אֶדַּמֶּה לְעֶלְיוֹן: אַךְ אֶל שְׁאוֹל תּוּרָד אֶל יַרְכְּתֵי בוֹר
​

"12[Oh,] how you have fallen from the heights [of your former power], Venus—Morning Star! [Oh, how] you have been cut down to the ground, Conqueror of Nations! 13You said to yourself, `I will ascend into Heaven, I will set my throne even higher than G-d's stars - I will sit at the extreme northern end of the Temple Mountain [the holiest part of the Temple courtyard where the most holy korbonos were slaughtered; cf. Vayikro 1:11] - 14I will rise above the highest clouds, I will become like the Supreme One!' 15But instead you have been brought down to the netherworld, to the depths of despair..."

Now, whom is Y'shayohu addressing so sarcastically as הֵילֵֽל haylél ("Venus"), בֶּֽן־שָֽׁחַר bĕn-shoḥar ("Morning Star"), and חוֹלֵֽשׁ עַל-גּוֹיִֽם ḥolésh ʿal goyim ("Conqueror of Nations")? Look no further than the chapter itself (v.4), as it actually says who it is about:

...וְנָשָׂאתָ הַמָּשָׁל הַזֶּה עַל מֶלֶךְ בָּבֶל...​

"...you shall recite this tirade against the king of Babylon..."

So, it is about the Babylonian king, N'vuchadnetzar. Compare this tirade that Y'shayohu is commanded to recite against N'vuchadnetzar with what Daniyel (4:25-34) tells us:

:כֹּלָּא מְּטָא עַל־נְבוּכַדְנֶצַּר מַלְכָּא
:לִקְצָת יַרְחִין תְּרֵי־עֲשַׂר עַל־הֵיכַל מַלְכוּתָא דִּי בָבֶל מְהַלֵּךְ הֲוָה
:עָנֵה מַלְכָּא וְאָמַר הֲלָא דָא־הִיא בָּבֶל רַבְּתָא דִּי־אֲנָה בֱנַיְתַהּ לְבֵית מַלְכוּ בִּתְקַף חִסְנִי וְלִיקָר הַדְרִי
:עוֹד מִלְּתָא בְּפֻם מַלְכָּא קָל מִן־שְׁמַיָּא נְפַל לָךְ אָמְרִין נְבוּכַדְנֶצַּר מַלְכָּא מַלְכוּתָא עֲדָת מִנָּךְ
:וּמִן־אֲנָשָׁא לָךְ טָרְדִין וְעִם־חֵיוַת בָּרָא מְדֹרָךְ עִשְׂבָּא כְתוֹרִין לָךְ יְטַעֲמוּן וְשִׁבְעָה עִדָּנִין יַחְלְפוּן עֲלָךְ עַד דִּי־תִנְדַּע דִּי־שַׁלִּיט עִלָּאָה בְּמַלְכוּת אֲנָשָׁא וּלְמַן־דִּי יִצְבֵּא יִתְּנִנַּהּ
:בַּהּ־שַׁעֲתָא מִלְּתָא סָפַת עַל־נְבוּכַדְנֶצַּר וּמִן־אֲנָשָׁא טְרִיד וְעִשְׂבָּא כְתוֹרִין יֵאכֻל וּמִטַּל שְׁמַיָּא גִּשְׁמֵהּ יִצְטַבַּע עַד דִּי שַׂעְרֵהּ כְּנִשְׁרִין רְבָה וְטִפְרוֹהִי כְצִפְּרִין
:וְלִקְצָת יוֹמַיָּא אֲנָה נְבוּכַדְנֶצַּר עַיְנַי ׀ לִשְׁמַיָּא נִטְלֵת וּמַנְדְּעִי עֲלַי יְתוּב וּלְעִלָּאָה בָּרְכֵת וּלְחַי עָלְמָא שַׁבְּחֵת וְהַדְּרֵת דִּי שָׁלְטָנֵהּ שָׁלְטָן עָלַם וּמַלְכוּתֵהּ עִם־דָּר וְדָר
:וְכָל־דָּיְרֵי אַרְעָא כְּלָה חֲשִׁיבִין וּכְמִצְבְּיֵהּ עָבֵד בְּחֵיל שְׁמַיָּא וְדָיְרֵי אַרְעָא וְלָא אִיתַי דִּי־יְמַחֵא בִידֵהּ וְיֵאמַר לֵהּ מָה עֲבַדְתְּ
:בֵּהּ־זִמְנָא מַנְדְּעִי ׀ יְתוּב עֲלַי וְלִיקַר מַלְכוּתִי הַדְרִי וְזִוִי יְתוּב עֲלַי וְלִי הַדָּבְרַי וְרַבְרְבָנַי יְבַעוֹן וְעַל־מַלְכוּתִי הָתְקְנַת וּרְבוּ יַתִּירָה הוּסְפַת לִי
:כְּעַן אֲנָה נְבֻכַדְנֶצַּר מְשַׁבַּח וּמְרוֹמֵם וּמְהַדַּר לְמֶלֶךְ שְׁמַיָּא דִּי כָל־מַעֲבָדוֹהִי קְשֹׁו֔ט וְאֹרְחָתֵהּ דִּין וְדִי מַהְלְכִין בְּגֵוָה יָכִל לְהַשְׁפָּלָה​

25All this happened to N'vuchadnetzar Malko [`King Nebuchadnezzar']:
26Twelve months later he was walking on top of the royal palace of Bovel.
27The king exclaimed and said, "Is this not the great Bovel, which I built as a royal palace with the strength of my power and for the honor of my glory?"
28The word was still in the king's mouth when a voice fell from heaven [which said], "They say this to you, N'vuchadnetzar Malko: `Your kingdom has turned away from you.
29They will banish you from men and your dwelling will be with wild animals; they will feed you grass like cattle and seven periods will pass over you, until you acknowledge that the Most High rules over the kingdom of man and He gives it to whomever He wishes'."
30Immediately, the decree was fulfilled upon N'vuchadnetzar: he was banished from men, he ate grass like cattle and his body was drenched with the dew of the heavens until his hair grew like the feathers of eagles and his nails like the claws of birds.
31But at the end of the seven years, I, N'vuchadnetzar, raised my eyes toward heaven and my understanding returned to me; I blessed the Most High and I praised and glorified Him Who lives to Eternity—Whose dominion is an eternal dominion and Whose kingdom is with every generation.
32[I said:] "All the inhabitants of the earth are like nothing compared to Him and He does with the host of heaven and the inhabitants of the earth according to His will; no-one can hold back His hand or say to Him, `What have You done?'
33At that time, my understanding was restored to me; I returned to the glory of my kingdom and my splendor was restored to me; my leaders and my dignitaries sought me out and I was established in my kingship and excessive greatness was added to me.
34Now, I, N'vuchadnetzar, do praise, exalt and glorify the King of heaven, Whose deeds are all true, Whose ways are just and Who can humble those who walk in pride!"

Y'shayohu 14:12 is a reference to the events detailed in Daniyel 4:25-34. Y'shayohu Hanovi was applying the verse sarcastically to N'vuchadnetzar, with reference to the passage quoted from Daniyel (which records how Hashem humbled N'vuchadnetzar until he was forced to recognize His authority over him).

 

[MMS]

@Koichos thanks for coming back

I actually was randomly reading about Shalim and Shahar...as I had never realized their was a myth prior to the time of Abraham

that said...what is your take on the story of Lot and the Levites concubine that has been on my mind

 

[MMS]

Sanchuniathon - Wikipedia

Spoiler

In surviving fragments of the text, it can be difficult to ascertain whether Eusebius is citing Philo's translation of Sanchuniathon or speaking in his own voice. Another difficulty is the substitution of Greek proper names for Phoenician ones and the possible corruption of some Phoenician names that do appear.[citation needed]

Philosophical creation story[edit]
A philosophical creation story traced to "the cosmogony of Taautus, whom Philo explicitly identifies with the Egyptian Thoth—"the first who thought of the invention of letters, and began the writing of records"—which begins with Erebus and Wind, between which Eros 'Desire' came to be. From this was produced Môt 'Death' but which the account says may mean 'mud'. In a mixed confusion,[clarification needed] the germs of life appear, and intelligent animals called Zophasemin (probably best translated 'observers of heaven') formed together as an egg. The account is not clear. Then Môt burst forth into light and the heavens were created and the various elements found their stations.[clarification needed][citation needed]

Following the etymological reasoning of Jacob Bryant in regard to the meaning of Môt, it can be noted that according to Ancient Egyptian mythology, Ma'at, wife of Thoth, is the personification of the fundamental order of the universe, without which all of creation would perish.[citation needed]

Allegorical culture heroes[edit]
According to the text, Copias and his wife Baau (translated as Nyx 'Night') give birth to mortals Aeon and Protogonus 'firstborn'); "and . . . when droughts occurred, they stretched out their hands to heaven towards the sun; for him alone (he says) they regarded as god the lord of heaven, calling him Beelsamen, which is in the Phoenician language 'lord of heaven,' and in Greek 'Zeus.'" (Eusebius, I, x). A race of Titan-like mountain beings arose, "sons of surpassing size and stature, whose names were applied to the mountains which they occupied . . . and they got their names, he says, from their mothers, as the women in those days had free intercourse with any whom they met." Various descendants are listed, many of whom have allegorical names but are described in the quotations from Philo as mortals who first made particular discoveries or who established particular customs.[citation needed]

The history of the gods[edit]
The work includes a genealogy and history of various northwest Semitic deities who were widely worshipped. Many are listed in the genealogy under the names of their counterparts in the Greek pantheon, Hellenized forms of their Semitic names, or both. The additional names given for some of these deities appear usually in parentheses in the table below. Only equations made in the text appear here, but many of the hyperlinks point to the northwest Semitic deities that are probably intended. See the notes below the table for translations of the unlinked and several other names.[citation needed]

As in the Greek and Hittite theogonies, Sanchuniathon's Elus/Cronus overthrows his father Sky or Uranus and castrates him. However, Zeus Demarûs (that is, Hadad Ramman), purported son of Dagon but actually son of Uranus, eventually joins with Uranus and wages war against Cronus. To El/Cronus is attributed the practice of circumcision. Twice we are told that El/Cronus sacrificed his own son. At some point, peace is made, and Zeus Adados (Hadad) and Astarte reign over the land with Cronus' permission. An account of the events is written by the Cabeiri and by Asclepius, under Thoth's direction.[citation needed]

Normally I see El associated with Uranus...but here he is associated with Saturn/Cronus

Why is Genesis 2:1 on page two...and not on page one

how does Egypt go from six day weeks...to the seven day week we have now

Spoiler

A passage about serpent worship follows in which it is not clear what part is from Sanchuniathon and what part from Philo of Byblus:

The nature then of the dragon and of serpents Tauthus himself regarded as divine, and so again after him did the Phoenicians and Egyptians: for this animal was declared by him to be of all reptiles most full of breath, and fiery. In consequence of which it also exerts an unsurpassable swiftness by means of its breath, without feet and hands or any other of the external members by which the other animals make their movements. It also exhibits forms of various shapes, and in its progress makes spiral leaps as swift as it chooses. It is also most long-lived, and its nature is to put off its old skin, and so not only to grow young again, but also to assume a larger growth; and after it has fulfilled its appointed measure of age, it is self-consumed, in like manner as Tauthus himself has set down in his sacred books: for which reason this animal has also been adopted in temples and in mystic rites.

 

[MMS]

the question is what does it have to do with Moonlight

Enoch calendar - Wikipedia

The Enoch calendar is an ancient calendar described in the pseudepigraphal Book of Enoch. It divided the year into four seasons of exactly 13 weeks each. Each such season consisted of two 30-day months followed by one 31-day month, with the 31st day ending the season, so that Enoch's Year consisted of exactly 364 days.

There is some evidence that the group whose writings were found at Qumran used a variation of the Enoch calendar (see Qumran calendar).

The Enoch calendar was purportedly given to Enoch by the angel Uriel. Four named days, inserted as the 31st day of every third month, were named instead of numbered, which "placed them outside the numbering". The Book of Enoch gives the count of 2,912 days for 8 years, which divides out to exactly 364 days per year. This specifically excludes any periodic intercalations.

Calendar expert John Pratt wrote that "The Enoch calendar has been criticized as hopelessly primitive because, with only 364 days, it would get out of sync with the seasons so quickly: in only 25 years the seasons would arrive an entire month early. Such a gross discrepancy, however, merely indicates that the method of intercalation has been omitted."[1] Pratt pointed out that by adding an extra week at the end of every seventh year (or Sabbatical year), and then adding two extra weeks to every fourth Sabbatical year (or every 28 years), the calendar could be as accurate as the Julian calendar.

Qumran calendrical texts - Wikipedia

The year is made up of twelve months, grouped in quarters. Each quarter contains three months; two of 30 days and one of 31 days, i.e. 91 days or 13 weeks, each quarter.[3] The following table shows a quarter of the year. (The day names are provided only to facilitate understanding. Other than the weekly Sabbath, the other days were merely numbered in the calendrical texts.)

The year and each of its quarters starts on the same day, the fourth day of the week (Wednesday to us). This was the day when the sun was created in Genesis 1:14–18.

However, the calendar as we know it is 364 days long, making it one and a quarter days short of a true year. This means, if it were put into practice, it would quickly lose synchronisation with astronomical events. Because of this, Lawrence Schiffman has stated the view that "this calendar was never really put to the test except perhaps for a short period".[4] Uwe Glessmer has proposed on the basis of 4Q319 ("Otot") that the calendar was in fact intercalated, a week being added every seven years to keep it synchronised with the solar year.[5] Roger Beckwith suggested that the discrepancy between the calendar and the true year, though noticed, may not have been of concern to the community that used the calendar.[6]

 

[MMS]

Story of Sinuhe - Wikipedia

Story of Sinuhe[edit]
Sinuhe is an official who accompanies prince Senwosret I to Libya. He overhears a conversation relaying the death of King Amenemhet I and as a result flees to Upper Retjenu (Canaan), leaving Egypt behind. He becomes the son-in-law of Chief Ammunenshi and in time his sons grow to become chiefs in their own right. Sinuhe fights rebellious tribes on behalf of Ammunenshi. As an old man, in the aftermath of defeating a powerful opponent in single combat, he prays for a return to his homeland:[7] "May god pity me...may he hearken to the prayer of one far away!...may the King have mercy on me...may I be conducted to the city of eternity!"[8] He then receives an invitation from King Senwosret I of Egypt to return, which he accepts in highly moving terms. Living out the rest of his life in royal favour, he is finally laid to rest in the necropolis in a beautiful tomb.[7]

The Story of Sinuhe has spawned a great deal of literature which explores the themes contained in the work from many perspectives. The scope and variety of this material has been likened to the analysis of Hamlet and other notable works of literature.[7] Scholars debate the reason why Sinuhe flees Egypt, with the majority ascribing panic over a perceived threat.[7] The tale is full of symbolic allusions. Sinuhe's name (="Son of the Sycamore") is seen as providing an important link in understanding the story. The sycamore is an ancient Egyptian Tree of Life,[10] associated with Hathor (the Goddess of fertility and rebirth and patroness of foreign countries), who features throughout the work.[7]

Sinuhe comes under the protective orbit of divine powers, in the form of the King, from whom he first tries to run away, and that of the Queen, a manifestation of Hathor. On fleeing Egypt, Sinuhe crosses a waterway associated with the Goddess Maat, the ancient Egyptian principle of truth, order and justice, in the vicinity of a sycamore tree.[7]

The ancient Egyptians believed in free will, implicit in the code of Maat, but this still allowed divine grace to work in and through the individual, and an overarching divine providence is seen in Sinuhe's flight and return to his homeland. Unable to escape the orbit of the gods' power and mercy, Sinuhe exclaims: "Whether I am in the Residence, or whether I am in this place, it is you who cover this horizon".[7]

Parallels have been made between the biblical narrative of Joseph and the Story of Sinuhe. In what is seen as divine providence, Sinuhe the Egyptian flees to Syro-Canaan and becomes a member of the ruling elite, acquires a wife and family, before being reunited with his Egyptian family. In what is seen as divine providence, the Syro-Canaanite Joseph is taken to Egypt where he becomes part of the ruling elite, acquires a wife and family, before being reunited with his Syro-Canaanite family.[7] Parallels have also been drawn from other biblical texts: the Hebrew prophet Jonah's frustrated flight from the orbit of God's power is likened to Sinuhe's similar flight from the King.[11] The battle between David and Goliath is compared to his fight with a mighty challenger, whom he slays with a single blow, and the parable of the Prodigal Son is likened to his return home.[12]

 

[DoubleClutch]

Whatever happened to this thread

Koichos went MIA but he had the goat Jewish knowledge

Anyways, the most important thing about “Egypt” is understanding how it fits Bible stories/prophecy

As well as ancient Egyptians being black

I have a new question maybe @Koichos can help me with if he’s still around

in Exodus 3 who is the “Angel of yaweh” that scripture refers to

In Exodus 3:2–6 "the angel of Yahweh" (מלאך יהוה) appeared to Moses in the flame of fire, and then "Yahweh" (יהוה) says to him: "I am the God of thy father".

What’s the Jewish understanding of this scripture/story

also in genesis 31:11-13

The angel of God said to me in the dream, ‘Jacob.’ I answered, ‘Here I am.’ And he said, ‘Look up and see that all the male goats mating with the flock are streaked, speckled or spotted, for I have seen all that Laban has been doing to you. I am the God of Bethel, where you anointed a pillar and where you made a vow to me. Now leave this land at once and go back to your native land.’”

why does the “Angel” of the lord say “I am the God of Bethel”?

isnt Bethel where earlier in the Bible Jacob first made an altar to Yaweh?

Considering that point of reference what does the term “Angel of the Lord” mean in Jewish scriptures as it was taught and interpreted to you from that story?

@MMS can also give his opinion but I wanted to hear from a practicing Jew (non Christian) perspective

I

 

[Koichos]

I have a new question maybe @Koichos can help me with if he’s still around

in Exodus 3 who is the “Angel of yaweh” that scripture refers to

In Exodus 3:2–6 "the angel of Yahweh" (מלאך יהוה) appeared to Moses in the flame of fire, and then "Yahweh" (יהוה) says to him: "I am the God of thy father".

What’s the Jewish understanding of this scripture/story

:וַיֵּרָא מַלְאַךְ ה׳ אֵלָיו בְּלַבַּת־אֵשׁ מִתּוֹךְ הַסְּנֶה וַיַּרְא וְהִנֵּה הַסְּנֶה בֹּעֵר בָּאֵשׁ וְהַסְּנֶה אֵינֶנּוּ אֻכָּל​

Then one of Hashem's messengers appeared to him in a fiery flame from the center of the thorn-bush; he gazed at it and, wow! the thorn-bush was blazing with fire and yet the thorn-bush was not being consumed. (Sh'moth 3:2)

The text is not clear on many points: some people say that it was the 'angel' serving as Hashem's messenger (the Hebrew word for an 'angel', מַלְאָךְ‎ malʾoch, in reality just means a 'messenger' anyway) speaking to Moshah, while others say that the vision Moshah saw was of an 'angel'—but it was Hashem Himself Who actually spoke to him from the thorn-bush. In any case, we can be sure than Moshah did not actually 'see' Hashem in the thorn-bush because, as he was told explicitly later on (in Sh'moth 33:20), no human being could survive the experience of seeing His 'face'. However, even the 'angel' did not take on the form of the burning bush, but only 'appeared [to him] in a fiery flame in the middle of the thorn-bush'.

Still, even so, what could be more explicit than לֹא בָאֵשׁ ה׳ 'Hashem was/is not in the fire' (M'lochim ʾAlaf 19:12)?

also in genesis 31:11-13

The angel of God said to me in the dream, ‘Jacob.’ I answered, ‘Here I am.’ And he said, ‘Look up and see that all the male goats mating with the flock are streaked, speckled or spotted, for I have seen all that Laban has been doing to you. I am the God of Bethel, where you anointed a pillar and where you made a vow to me. Now leave this land at once and go back to your native land.’”

why does the “Angel” of the lord say “I am the God of Bethel”?

'Angels' (Hebrew: מַלְאָכִים malʾochim, 'messengers') frequently speak on behalf of Hashem in the first-person in the Tanach, for example: כִּי־מַשְׁחִתִים אֲנַחְנוּ אֶת־הַמָּקוֹם הַזֶּה 'for we are destroying this place' (B'reshıth 19:13)—because it was Hashem Himself, and not an 'angel', Who overturned S'dom and ʿAmoroh (B'reshıth 19:24, see also D'vorim 29:22). It should be noted that while the angels tell Lott in 19:13 כִּי־מַשְׁחִתִים אֲנַחְנוּ אֶת־הַמָּקוֹם הַזֶּה 'we are destroying this place', in verse 24 it says וַה׳ הִמְטִיר עַל־סְדֹם וְעַל־עֲמֹרָה גָּפְרִית וָאֵשׁ מֵאֵת ה׳ מִן־הַשָּׁמָיִם 'Then Hashem rained burning sulfur on S'dom and on ʿAmoroh, from Hashem, from Heaven'. Incidentally, chapters 18 and 19 of B'reshιth only ever mention S'dom and ʿAmoroh (although all five cities—including צֹעַר Ssoʿar—are listed several chapters earlier in B'reshιth 14:2 & 14:8); it is only in D'vorim 29:22 that the destruction of the four cities of the plains (סְדֹם S'dom, עֲמֹרָה ʿAmoroh, אַדְמָה ʾAdmoh, צְבֹיִים Ss'voyim) is recorded.

Considering that point of reference what does the term “Angel of the Lord” mean in Jewish scriptures as it was taught and interpreted to you from that story?

The phrase מַלְאַךְ ה׳ malʾach hashem ('a messenger of Hashem'—note the lack of a definite article prefix ה־) occurs in the Tanach a total of fifty-eight times and gentiles insist on translating it on almost every occasion as 'the angel of the Lord'. The normal rules of writing, however, would suggest that the first time the phrase מַלְאַךְ ה׳ malʾach hashem occurs in a particular section it should be rendered 'a malʾoch of Hashem', and only subsequently, whenever the malʾoch is mentioned again, should it be translated 'the malʾoch of Hashem' (that is, the one that has already been referred to), because it would be ridiculous to refer to 'the angel' in a passage where no 'angel' has previously been mentioned, implying that Hashem only has one 'angel'. Thus, an honest translation of מַלְאַךְ ה׳ malʾach hashem ought really to be 'a messenger [or, 'an angel'] of Hashem' because there is absolutely nothing in the Tanach that suggests the same entity is meant on every occasion.

 

[DoubleClutch]

The text is not clear on many points: some people say that it was the 'angel' serving as Hashem's messenger (the Hebrew word for an 'angel', מַלְאָךְ‎ malʾoch, in reality just means a 'messenger' anyway) speaking to Moshah, while others say that the vision Moshah saw was of an 'angel'—but it was Hashem Himself Who actually spoke to him from the thorn-bush. In any case, we can be sure than Moshah did not actually 'see' Hashem in the thorn-bush because, as he was told explicitly later on (in Sh'moth 33:20), no human being could survive the experience of seeing His 'face'. However, even the 'angel' did not take on the form of the burning bush, but only 'appeared [to him] in a fiery flame in the middle of the thorn-bush'.

Still, even so, what could be more explicit than לֹא בָאֵשׁ ה׳ 'Hashem was/is not in the fire' (M'lochim ʾAlaf 19:12)?

'Angels' (Hebrew: מַלְאָכִים malʾochim, 'messengers') frequently speak on behalf of Hashem in the first-person in the Tanach, for example: כִּי־מַשְׁחִתִים אֲנַחְנוּ אֶת־הַמָּקוֹם הַזֶּה 'for we are destroying this place' (B'reshıth 19:13)—because it was Hashem Himself, and not an 'angel', Who overturned S'dom and ʿAmoroh (B'reshıth 19:24, see also D'vorim 29:22). It should be noted that while the angels tell Lott in 19:13 כִּי־מַשְׁחִתִים אֲנַחְנוּ אֶת־הַמָּקוֹם הַזֶּה 'we are destroying this place', in verse 24 it says וַה׳ הִמְטִיר עַל־סְדֹם וְעַל־עֲמֹרָה גָּפְרִית וָאֵשׁ מֵאֵת ה׳ מִן־הַשָּׁמָיִם 'Then Hashem rained burning sulfur on S'dom and on ʿAmoroh, from Hashem, from Heaven'. Incidentally, chapters 18 and 19 of B'reshιth only ever mention S'dom and ʿAmoroh (although all five cities—including צֹעַר Ssoʿar—are listed several chapters earlier in B'reshιth 14:2 & 14:8); it is only in D'vorim 29:22 that the destruction of the four cities of the plains (סְדֹם S'dom, עֲמֹרָה ʿAmoroh, אַדְמָה ʾAdmoh, צְבֹיִים Ss'voyim) is recorded.

The phrase מַלְאַךְ ה׳ malʾach hashem ('a messenger of Hashem'—note the lack of a definite article prefix ה־) occurs in the Tanach a total of fifty-eight times and gentiles insist on translating it on almost every occasion as 'the angel of the Lord'. The normal rules of writing, however, would suggest that the first time the phrase מַלְאַךְ ה׳ malʾach hashem occurs in a particular section it should be rendered 'a malʾoch of Hashem', and only subsequently, whenever the malʾoch is mentioned again, should it be translated 'the malʾoch of Hashem' (that is, the one that has already been referred to), because it would be ridiculous to refer to 'the angel' in a passage where no 'angel' has previously been mentioned, implying that Hashem only has one 'angel'. Thus, an honest translation of מַלְאַךְ ה׳ malʾach hashem ought really to be 'a messenger [or, 'an angel'] of Hashem' because there is absolutely nothing in the Tanach that suggests the same entity is meant on every occasion.

I agree that the title THE Angel of the lord after saying “a Angel of the lord” is just something writers did to refer to a reoccurring character in the story..... seeing as this Angel isn’t given a name.... it’s just a generic Angel for all we know.

but then why does Jacob bless his sons and mention GOD twice and the ANGEL? But not just any Angel but a Angel who redeems?


Genesis 48:15-16,
Then he blessed Joseph and said, “May the God before whom my fathers Abraham and Isaac walked faithfully, the God who has been my shepherd all my life to this day, the Angel who has redeemed me from all harm— may he bless these boys. May they preserve my name and the names of Abraham and Isaac. And may their descendants multiply greatly throughout the earth.”

this leads us to believe he’s talking about a specific “messenger” or instance/action by this individual

what does this verse mean?

even so is it 100% that the word Messenger always means a physical being or something seen or can it be referring to the message someone hears from GOD

opposed to actually seeing an Angel manifest as a man or something you can call a name or recognize

for example the “message” came from the burning bush not the fire per se. the bush burning and not consuming in the fire was a miraculous event to get his attention

yea GOD wasn’t in the fire for Elijah but he was in the small voice or the voice was God

the burning bush + voice was representative of God and not an Angel like Gabriel or Michael or something

I think we can agree on that?

Also wasnt GOD in the tabernacle? It’s not impossible that God can manifest in Objects on earth or is it?

so I guess the point is what do people in the Bible see when they refer to an Angel sent from GOD vs THE Angel of the Lord/God

And what’s the difference between the Angels in the Bible as we imagine it as a physical being on earth (with wings etc) and just the literal definition of the word as a message from God which can be anything that accompanied a message as spoken by God or an act of God himself

seems like only Jacob knows the difference 100% in this case

we can only interpret what he means based on what we know about the Bible

 

[MMS]

I agree that the title THE Angel of the lord after saying “a Angel of the lord” is just something writers did to refer to a reoccurring character in the story..... seeing as this Angel isn’t given a name.... it’s just a generic Angel for all we know.

but then why does Jacob bless his sons and mention GOD twice and the ANGEL? But not just any Angel but a Angel who redeems?


Genesis 48:15-16,
Then he blessed Joseph and said, “May the God before whom my fathers Abraham and Isaac walked faithfully, the God who has been my shepherd all my life to this day, the Angel who has redeemed me from all harm— may he bless these boys. May they preserve my name and the names of Abraham and Isaac. And may their descendants multiply greatly throughout the earth.”

this leads us to believe he’s talking about a specific “messenger” or instance/action by this individual

what does this verse mean?

even so is it 100% that the word Messenger always means a physical being or something seen or can it be referring to the message someone hears from GOD

opposed to actually seeing an Angel manifest as a man or something you can call a name or recognize

for example the “message” came from the burning bush not the fire per se. the bush burning and not consuming in the fire was a miraculous event to get his attention

yea GOD wasn’t in the fire for Elijah but he was in the small voice or the voice was God

the burning bush + voice was representative of God and not an Angel like Gabriel or Michael or something

I think we can agree on that?

Also wasnt GOD in the tabernacle? It’s not impossible that God can manifest in Objects on earth or is it?

so I guess the point is what do people in the Bible see when they refer to an Angel sent from GOD vs THE Angel of the Lord/God

And what’s the difference between the Angels in the Bible as we imagine it as a physical being on earth (with wings etc) and just the literal definition of the word as a message from God which can be anything that accompanied a message as spoken by God or an act of God himself

seems like only Jacob knows the difference 100% in this case

we can only interpret what he means based on what we know about the Bible

ask yourself this

how do you see angel(s) just in scripture?

if God speaks "unto man" then by default it means your tongue is a gateway of sorts (and a tongue could be construed as a serpent, and a sword)

Why did you walk away from religion/god?

 

[Koichos]

but then why does Jacob bless his sons and mention GOD twice and the ANGEL? But not just any Angel but a Angel who redeems?

Genesis 48:15-16,

this leads us to believe he’s talking about a specific “messenger” or instance/action by this individual

Interestingly, there are only two verses in the Tanach that use the word וְיִקָּרֵא w'yiqqoreʾ: future tense, nifʿal (passive) meaning 'it will be called'; this inflection occurs in B'reshıth 48:16 and Ruth 4:14. The first of these is

:הַמַּלְאָךְ הַגֹּאֵל אֹתִי מִכָּל־רָע יְבָרֵךְ אֶת־הַנְּעָרִים וְיִקָּרֵא בָהֶם שְׁמִי וְשֵׁם אֲבֹתַי אַבְרָהָם וְיִצְחָק וְיִדְגּוּ לָרֹב בְּקֶרֶב הָאָרֶץ​

May the malʾoch [messenger, 'angel'] who redeems me from anything bad bless these youths and may they be known by my name and by my fathers ʾAvrohom's and Yiss'hoq's names; they will swarm like fish in the belly of the land! (B'reshıth 48:16)

and the other is

:וַתֹּאמַרְנָה הַנָּשִׁים אֶל־נָעֳמִי בָּרוּךְ ה׳ אֲשֶׁר לֹא הִשְׁבִּית לָךְ גֹּאֵל הַיּוֹם וְיִקָּרֵא שְׁמוֹ בְּיִשְׂרָאֵל​

The women then said to Noʿomi, 'How blessed Hashem—who did not fail you today with a redeemer—is! he [the redeemer] will be famous in Yisroʾel! (Ruth 4:14)

The first of these verses (B'reshıth 48:16) is awkward to translate into English because the structure of the Hebrew is actually 'many my name and my fathers' names be called in them', so it is necessary to reverse the word-order and adjust the grammatical structure to write it in meaningful and correct English. In the second verse, the literal wording of the Hebrew is 'may his name be called', a colloquial usage that is equivalent to 'he will be famous'. Note that the initial ו wow of the verb in B'reshıth 48:16 and Ruth 4:14 is pointed with sh'woʾ (וְ), not pattah (וַ), so it is not an 'inverting wow' (in which case the tense would be reversed from future to past, 'it was called'); it is merely a conjunctive wow. On a slightly different tack, B'reshıth 48:16 demonstrates that Jews were compared to fish centuries before Yushke and his idolatrous lies appeared on the scene. In B'reshıth 48:16 Yaʿaqov ʾOvinu blessed his two grandsons ʾAf'rayim and M'nashah with these words.

*B'reshıth 48:16 begins הַמַּלְאָךְ ('the maloʾch'—note the definite article prefix ה־) because it refers back to B'reshıth 31:11ff which says מַלְאַךְ הָאֱלֹהִים ('a malʾoch of the ʾAlohim')—i.e., the one that has already been referred to.

even so is it 100% that the word Messenger always means a physical being or something seen or can it be referring to the message someone hears from GOD

opposed to actually seeing an Angel manifest as a man or something you can call a name or recognize

The Hebrew word for 'angel' is מַלְאָךְ malʾoch (plural מַלְאָכִים malʾochim), which really just means a 'messenger'; there are human messengers as well as incorporeal, spiritual messengers (without any immediate distinction being apparent in the Hebrew text). There are, actually, several passages in the Tanach where it is not immediately apparent which kind of 'messengers' is meant: an excellent example of this occurs in the book B'reshιth (32:4), which might give the impression that human 'messengers' are intended (especially when the verse is read without reference to the previous two verses, as often happens because a new poroshoh—or weekly section, according to the Hebrew divisions—begins at verse 4); however, when one reads the whole passage, it merges that Yaʿaqov was sending the same מַלְאָכִים malʾochim ('messengers', but in this verse incorporeal, spiritual messengers or 'angels' are meant) that he had just encountered to greet his brother ʿEsow:

...וַיִּשְׁלַח יַעֲקֹב מַלְאָכִים לְפָנָיו אֶל־עֵשָׂו אָחִיו​

Yaʿaqov sent malʾochim ahead of himself to [meet] his brother ʿEsow... (B'reshιth 32:4)

Were these human malʾochim or spiritual ones? We would have no way of knowing they were spiritual (i.e., 'angels') if the verse in question were not a continuation of verses 2 and 3:

:'וְיַעֲקֹב הָלַךְ לְדַרְכּוֹ וַיִּפְגְּעוּ־בוֹ מַלְאֲכֵי אֱלֹקִים: וַיֹּאמֶר יַעֲקֹב, כַּאֲשֶׁר רָאָם: 'מַחֲנֵה אֱלֹהִים זֶה!' וַיִּקְרָא שֵׁם־הַמָּקוֹם הַהוּא 'מַחֲנָיִם​

So Yaʿaqov continued on his way and some of ʾAlohim's malʾochim met him. When he saw them, Yaʿaqov said: 'This is ʾAlohim's camp!'—so he named that place 'Mahanoyim' ('the twin camps'). (B'reshιth 32:2-3)

Also wasnt GOD in the tabernacle?

I.e., the portable Temple, which was known as the מִשְׁכָּן mish'kon ('dwelling place'—same root as the word שְׁכִינָה sh'chinoh, meaning 'the [Divine] Presence', but literally 'that which is dwelling') or אֹהֶל מוֹעֵד ʾohal moʿedh ('special tent').

While the literal word שְׁכִינָה sh'chinoh is not used in the Tanach, phrases such as לְשַׁכֵּן שְׁמוֹ שָׁם (D'vorim 12:11, 14:23, 16:2, 16:6, 16:11, 26:2; see also N'hamyoh 1:9) and לְשִׁכְנוֹ תִדְרְשׁוּ וּבָאתָ שָׁמָּה (D'vorim 12:5) do occur many times in the text. As far as I am aware, the only explicit description of what the שְׁכִינָה sh'chinoh 'looked' like occurs in verse 28 of Y'hazqeʾl's first chapter, where the prophet tells us it 'looked' to him like a blaze of bright colors...

:כְּמַרְאֵה הַקֶּשֶׁת אֲשֶׁר יִהְיֶה בֶעָנָן בְּיוֹם הַגֶּשֶׁם כֵּן מַרְאֵה הַנֹּגַהּ סָבִיב הוּא מַרְאֵה דְּמוּת כְּבוֹד־ה׳ וָאֶרְאֶה וָאֶפֹּל עַל־פָּנַי וָאֶשְׁמַע קוֹל מְדַבֵּר​

...similar to the appearance of the rainbow that is visible in the clouds on a rainy day, this is what the brightness round about [Him] looked like—that was what the appearance of Hashem's glory looked like; when I saw it I threw myself facedown on the ground, and I heard a voice speaking to me. (Y'hazqeʾl 1:28)

It’s not impossible that God can manifest in Objects on earth or is it?

As we are told in Tahillim 115:2-3 (לָמָּה יֹאמְרוּ הַגּוֹיִם: 'אַיֵּה־נָא אֱלֹהֵיהֶם?' וֵאלֹהֵינוּ בַשָּׁמָיִם - כֹּל אֲשֶׁר־חָפֵץ עָשָׂה׃ "Why should the goyyim taunt us by asking, 'Where is their ʾAlohim now?'—our ʾAlohim is in Heaven; He can do anything He pleases!!"), and again in 135:6, Hashem is able to do anything that He wants to do. But there are some things that He does not ever do. In the Tanach, He emphasizes repeatedly that Yisroʾel saw no physical representation of any kind during the Revelation at Mount Horev [in the Sinai Desert] and, even though Hashem did choose to 'manifest' Himself to human beings in various forms on rare occasions, such 'manifestations' were not in fact Himself, but only 'visions' for the benefit of those seeing them. Generally speaking, when Hashem has 'appeared' to this Biblical figure or that Biblical figure, the text does not actually say what 'form' He adopted because it is not considered important—for example, B'reshıth 18:1 merely tells us that

...וַיֵּרָא אֵלָיו ה׳ בְּאֵלֹנֵי מַמְרֵא​

Hashem appeared to him [ʾAvrohom] at Mam'reʾ's Oaks...

However, it makes no mention of what 'form' the vision took; the subsequent statement in verse 2 that he וַיִּשָּׂא עֵינָיו וַיַּרְא וְהִנֵּה שְׁלֹשָׁה אֲנָשִׁים נִצָּבִים עָלָיו 'raised his eyes and saw three 'men' standing by him' is describing a separate event—(i) Hashem 'appeared' to him, and (ii) he also saw three 'men' standing by him—because verse 22 makes it very clear that the 'three men' (they were malʾochim) were completely separate from and independent of the vision of Hashem 'appearing to him'...

:וַיִּפְנוּ מִשָּׁם הָאֲנָשִׁים וַיֵּלְכוּ סְדֹמָה וְאַבְרָהָם עוֹדֶנּוּ עֹמֵד לִפְנֵי ה׳​

The men (ʾanoshim) had turned away from there [Mam'reʾ's Oaks] and were on their way toward S'dom, but ʾAvrohom was still standing in Hashem's Presence. (B'reshıth 18:22)

 

[Koichos]

And what’s the difference between the Angels in the Bible as we imagine it as a physical being on earth (with wings etc)...

When I was in preschool I was taught that the כְּרֻבִים k'ruvim appeared as children with wings; later, I learned that this was because the Aramaic word כְּרוּבָא k'ruvoʾ, a direct cognate of the Hebrew כְּרוּב k'ruv, can be thought of as a combination of the prepositive כְּ־ k'- ('like') and the noun ־רוֹבְיָא -rov'yoʾ ('a child')—that is, the compound can be thought as equivalent to 'like a child'... when b'nei Yisroʾel were good, the k'ruvim would face one another and when b'nei Yisroʾel would sin, the k'ruvim would face away from one another. In any event, nobody really knows what the k'ruvim looked like because they were seldom seen before the First Temple was built and never afterward (apart from by the Head Kohen, of course).

I can think of only two places in the Tanach where we are given actual descriptions of what various kinds of malʾochim looked like (a malʾoch is simply a 'messenger'—there are human messengers as well as incorporeal, spiritual messengers or 'angels'); the k'ruvim mentioned in B'reshıth 3:24 are never described at all and those we read about in Sh'moth 25:18ff, M'lochim ʾAlaf 6:23ff are only described as having 'wings'. In Y'shaʿyohu 6:2, that prophet describes having seen sorof angels (s'rofim or 'burners'—so described because one of them burned his lip with a glowing coal 'that it had taken from the Miz'béah with a pair of tongs', see Y'shaʿyohu 6:6) standing above the [Holy] Throne, and he notes that 'each of them had three pairs of wings' but gives no other description as regards their appearance. Apart from these few instances, 'angels' are usually referred to in the Tanach simply as ʾanoshim ('people'), as in B'reshıth 18:2, for example; and even where they are actually called 'malʾochim' it becomes clear sooner or later that they gave the impression of being human: thus, Mono'ah thought the malʾoch that visited him and his wife was just a 'man of ʾAlohim' (that is, a prophet)—Shof'ṭim 13:6 and 13:8—and only realized it was actually a malʾoch (an incorporeal, spiritual messenger or 'angel') when it 'did something extraordinary while he and his wife were watching' and 'flew up into the sky in the altar fire' (Shof'ṭim 13:19-20, 21).

The prophet who goes into the most detail on malʾochim is Y'hazqeʾl who describes having seen four 'hayyoth' (literally, 'living beings') that 'had the shape of a man' (1:5), but each of them also had 'four faces and two pair of wings' (1:6); they had 'straight legs' and 'round feet' and their bodies appeared 'to twinkle with the color of polished copper' (1:7). They had 'human hands' under their wings 'on each of their four sides', and 'each of the four [sides] had the same faces and wings' (1:8); their wings were 'joined together' and, seemingly, each one's four faces faced in different directions so they did not have to turn about whichever direction they wanted to proceed in (1:9). The four faces were—(i) human (presumably in the middle), (ii) leonine to the 'right', (iii) bovine to the 'left', and (iv) also—presumably at the 'back'—aquiline (1:10); and the description continues: They 'rushed about, backward and forward' and appeared 'like sparks' (1:14), and there were four ʾofannim (which could be another type of angel or could just mean 'wheels') below them—the text, however, seems to be saying that each of them had four 'ʾofannim', not that there were four ʾofannim between them (i.e., one each). They also had 'incredibly high backs' and eyebrows that were 'full of eyes' (1:18)... I think I should stop there, because it is very obvious that Y'hazqeʾl had no clue what he was seeing, and was just describing the 'creatures' in the best way he could.

seems like only Jacob knows the difference 100% in this case

Hebrew does not have a letter that sounds like 'J' (except for when b'nei San'ʿa pronounce ג like a 'J' if it is marked with a dogesh—that is, גּ), but you already knew that; and a Hebrew word can almost never end with a 'B' sound. The terminal ב, with dogesh (i.e., בּ - corresponding to the sound of 'B' in English) is so rare that I can only think of ONE word in all of Tanach that does: וַיִשְׁבְּ ('and he captured') in B'midbor 21:1 and Yir'm'yohu 41:10, a truncated form of the third-person singular of verb-stem שבה (to capture) in the future tense—normally written in full יִשְׁבֶּה ('he will capture')—with the וי״ו ההפוך (i.e., ו - reversing the tense from future to past) prepended to it. Put simply, the patriarch's name is יַעֲקֹב, not גֵּיקֹבְּ!!!

we can only interpret what he means based on what we know about the Bible

There is something surreal about a situation in which a person who cannot even read what a text actually says pontificating pedantically about what it means; one needs to know what the 'Bible' actually says before one can even think about 'interpreting' it.