Bibliology: Linguistics

Linguistics

Introduction

This study makes no pretense of being scholarly. Rather it’s a layman’s look at the problem. Ever since his creation, man has had the gift of speech. Take Adam and Eve, for example. We have no clue, what sort of language was spoken by Adam and Eve; nor do we know when humans began to write, except that it was a long, long, long time ago, as much as 9,000 years ago, or more.[1]

Let’s build a model based on these ideas. We will name the associated unidentified dialects or languages by adding either of the suffixes, -ic or -ish, to people’s names: so, Adam and Eve spoke Adamic or; if you prefer, Evish.[2]

Heavens and Earth

Since Adam (אָדָ֑ם | Ἀδάμ) and Eve (חַוָּ֣ה | Εὔα)[3] had at least three children, the ones we know by name: Cain (קַ֔יִן | Κάϊν), Abel (הָ֑בֶל | Ἄβελ), and Seth (שֵׁ֑ת | Σήθ). In keeping with our model, language transitioned over time to Cainic, Abelic, and Sethic. Abelic did not survive as a dialect, because Abel died without known successors.

Name	Hebrew	Greek	Language
Adam	אָדָ֑ם	Ἀδάμ	Adamic
Eve	חַוָּ֣ה	Εὔα	Evish
Cain	קַ֔יִן	Κάϊν	Cainic
Abel	הָ֑בֶל	Ἄβελ	Abelic
Seth	שֵׁ֑ת	Σήθ	Sethic

Cain

Cain’s posterity in sequence were: Enoch (חֲנ֑וֹךְ | Ἐνώχ), Irad (עִירָ֔ד | Γαϊδάδ),[4] Mehujael (מְחֽוּיָאֵ֑ל | Μαλελεήλ), Methusael (מְת֣וּשָׁאֵ֔ל | Μαθουσάλα), and Lamech (לָֽמֶךְ | Λάμεχ). So, the transition of dialects was Enochic, Iradic, Mehujaelic, Methusaelic, and Lamechic. Lamech had four children: Jabal (יָבָ֑ל | Ιωβήλ), Jubal (יוּבָ֑ל | Ιουβάλ), Tubal-Cain (תּֽוּבַל־קַ֖יִן | Θόβελ),[5] and Naamah (נַֽעֲמָֽה | Νοεμά), which is where the record of Cain’s genealogy seems to end.[6] The transition of dialects continues with Jabalic, Jubalic, Thubalic, and Naamahish. This or these dialect(s) must be somewhat different than that of the other branch of Adam’s family by the time that one thousand years have passed.

Name	Hebrew	Greek	Language
Cain	קַ֔יִן	Κάϊν	Cainic
Enoch	חֲנ֑וֹךְ	Ἐνώχ	Enochic-C
Irad	עִירָ֔ד	Γαϊδάδ	Iradic
Mehujael	מְחֽוּיָאֵ֑ל	Μαλελεήλ	Mehujaelic-C
Methusael	מְת֣וּשָׁאֵ֔ל	Μαθουσάλα	Methusaelic-C
Lamech	לָֽמֶךְ	Λάμεχ	Lamechic-C
Jabal	יָבָ֑ל	Ιωβήλ	Jabalic
Jubal	יוּבָ֑ל	Ιουβάλ	Jubalic
Tubal	תּֽוּבַל	Θόβελ	Thubalic
Naamah	נַֽעֲמָֽה	Νοεμά	Naamahish

Now we return to Adam and Eve’s third son Seth and the Sethic dialect.

Adam

The chain of Seth’s posterity ran Enos (אֱנ֑וֹשׁ | Ἐνὼς), Cainan, (קֵינָֽן | Καϊνᾶν) Mahalaleel (מַֽהֲלַלְאֵֽל | Μαλελεήλ), Jared (יָֽרֶד | Ἰάρεδ), Enoch (חֲנֽוֹךְ | Ἐνὼχ), Methuselah (מְתוּשָֽׁלַח | Μαθουσάλα), Lamech (לָֽמֶךְ | Λάμεχ), and Noah (נֹ֖חַ | Νῶε). Some of these names in Seth’s posterity are the same as the names in Cain’s posterity; so, to distinguish the different lines we will call the one -C, and the other -S. We also remember that they are cousins; yet we have no way of knowing how close or how estranged they might have been. So now we have Enosic, Cainanic, Mahalaleelic-S, Jaredic, Enochic-S, Methuselahic-S, Lamechic-S, and Noahic.

Name	Hebrew	Greek	Language
Seth	שֵׁ֑ת	Σήθ	Sethic
Enos	אֱנ֑וֹשׁ	Ἐνὼς	Enosic
Cainan	קֵינָֽן	Καϊνᾶν	Cainanic
Mahalaleel	מַֽהֲלַלְאֵֽל	Μαλελεήλ	Mahalaleelic-S
Jared	יָֽרֶד	Ἰάρεδ	Jaredic
Enoch	חֲנֽוֹךְ	Ἐνὼχ	Enochic-S
Methuselah	מְתוּשָֽׁלַח	Μαθουσάλα	Methuselahic-S
Lamech	לָֽמֶךְ	Λάμεχ	Lamechic-S
Noah	נֹ֖חַ	Νῶε	Noahic

Noah has three sons: Shem (שֵׁ֖ם | Σήμ),[7] Ham (חָ֥ם | Χάμ),[8] and Japheth (יָֽפֶת | Ἰάφεθ),[9] leading to new dialects called Shemic, Hamic, and Japhethic; or as they are more commonly known Semitic, Hamitic, and Japhetic. By this time, man has almost certainly begun to write.[10]

Name	Hebrew	Greek	Language
Shem	שֵׁ֖ם	Σήμ	Semitic
Ham	חָ֥ם	Χάμ	Hamitic
Japheth	יָֽפֶת	Ἰάφεθ	Japhetic

Here we have what we might want to call the origination of linguistic families,[11] or something of the sort. We don’t really know what these families are, at least not yet; nor do we know with great certainty where this is leading.[12]

Before we rush blindly ahead with our favorite theory; let’s review what we do not know about the Antediluvian world.

† We do not know what their language structure actually looked like, other than the model we just constructed. There is no evidence to connect our model with linguistic reality. If any evidence survived the flood, we don’t know where to find it, how to identify it, how to crack its code structure, or how to interpret it.

† We do not know what their geographical shape actually looked like. The world that then was, being so rent that the very tectonic plates were violently moved, leaves little geographic certainty.

† We do not know what their time structure actually looked like either. If the world that then was, was so rent that the very tectonic plates were violently moved, the world may have had a different axis, different spin, different day length, and more.

† We do not understand the Antediluvian mathematics very well.

† We do not know what the events looked like, because we have no evidence.[13] Since we may believe that the flood was universal; we also believe that there is ample evidence of the flood in the vast and violent tectonic plate displacement: we still cannot be absolutely sure that there were no other survivors clinging to bits of wood on the other side of the planet. The report we have, is written from Noah’s perspective. Even though Noah has Divine help, there is little evidence that God gave Noah ubiquitous knowledge. In spite of the fact that the report is written from Noah’s perspective, it is more likely the record of a later reporter (Abraham, for example), and not Noah’s personal observation. So, any precision of events is tenuous as well.

Noah

What we do know with great certainty is that the flood was chaotic; a new world emerged that was rather unlike the world that had been before. We know that if anyone else survived, Noah had no knowledge of them. Science raises other questions. Is there enough water on earth to support a global deluge?[14] The principal linguistic reason for leaving this discussion open-ended is that Wycliffe Bible Translators, and others like them, have discovered so many new languages that we don’t know where to fit them all: why should we pretend that we know what we do not know.

So here we stand on the threshold of the new world with three language families that we will have trouble identifying with absolute certainty: Semitic, Hamitic, and Japhetic. To make matters worse, most approaches to this problem use geographic rather than ancestral names. The problem before us, now, becomes one of trying to match the biblical linguistic names with the scientific linguistic names: in some cases we can build very strong, even certain associations; in other cases we are completely flummoxed.

From this point on we will continue to build our data base; still, we will not be able to complete an exhaustive data base: we leave such attempts to professional linguists and epigraphers. We may, however, get a glimpse of what’s afoot with our humble model.

We remember that language is first spoken, a matter of sounds; then written, a way to record sounds in various symbols. We first learn to make sounds and speak, as we are being dandled on our mother’s knees, by imitating the muscle movements she makes as she speaks. In time the used muscles and muscle memory develop; while the unused muscles and muscle memory atrophy. By three or four years of age our basic speech patterns are fully developed: some sounds are no longer possible for us to make, while others are extremely difficult for us to make. When names interface between two languages, we at first attempt to vocalize them perfectly, so as not to offend the name’s owner. When we fail, we resort to the closest name possible; sometimes the difficulty is so great that we have to rename a person. It is this property of names that is the reason they are emphasized in our data base: names are supposed to sound alike in every language.

We are not claiming that all languages are phonic, especially cuneiform and pictographic languages; yet, if there is no way to decode sounds, our task becomes much more difficult.

In comparing Hebrew and Greek, we discover that some names sound nearly identical, while others are quite a bit different. Several possibilities arise from these similarities and differences. By detailed and meticulous comparison we may be able to improve our vocalization. We may discover probable manuscript errors.[15] We hope to develop detailed lexicons.

The professional linguist may wish to extend this comparison to several thousand languages; insights, into meanings that may very well develop by playing with the possible variations in sounds and stumbling on similarities. This sort of play with word sounds eventually led Egyptologists to believe that they had discovered the word, Israel, on the Merneptah Stele. There are words, like coffee and camel, that sound nearly alike in most languages. Being able to find such sounds may be like finding a needle in a hay stack; yet such finds help us figure out how languages develop and relate. So, it is with these sound similarities for which we look; when we see what the experts have already found, the picture may begin to make more sense.

We will also have an eye out for the scope and impact of a language’s use. So, if we discover a particular language, which is in use over most of the known world, which is evidenced by sizeable libraries, and which has a well-developed literature; in such a case we may conclude that such a language or language development is much more important than other languages that have no scope outside of a tribe, form no libraries, have no literature, and are only attested in a few fragments.

This then, is our quest, an attempt to uncover the most important languages in the biblical orbit of life in the Postdiluvian world leading up to the establishment of the family lines of Esau and Jacob.

Japheth

Name	Hebrew	Greek	Language
Japheth	יָֽפֶת	Ἰάφεθ	Japhetic
Gomer	גֹּ֣מֶר	Γαμὲρ
Magog	מָג֔וֹג	Μαγὼγ
Madai	מָדַ֖י	Μαδοὶ
Javan	יָוָ֣ן	Ἰωύαν
Elis(h)ah	???	Ἐλισὰ
Tubal	תֻבָ֑ל	Θοβὲλ
Mes(h)ech	מֶ֖שֶׁךְ	Μοσόχ
Tiras	תִירָֽס	Θείρας

Gomer has three lines: Ashkenaz (אַשְׁכֲּנַ֥ז | Ἀσχανὰζ),[17] Riphath (רִיפַ֖ת | Ριφὰθ), and Togarmah (תֹגַרְמָֽה | Θοργαμά).

Name	Hebrew	Greek	Language
Gomer	גֹּ֣מֶר	Γαμὲρ
Ashkenaz	אַשְׁכֲּנַ֥ז	Ἀσχανὰζ
Riphath	רִיפַ֖ת	Ριφὰθ
Togarmah	תֹגַרְמָֽה	Θοργαμά

Javan has four lines: Elishah (אֱלִישָׁ֣ה | Ἐλισὰ), Tarshish (תַרְשִׁ֑ישׁ | Θάρσεις)[18], Kittim (כִּתִּ֖ים | Κίτιοι), and Dodanim (דֹדָנִֽים | Ρόδιοι)[19].

Name	Hebrew	Greek	Language
Javan	יָוָ֣ן	Ἰωύαν
Elishah	אֱלִישָׁ֣ה	Ἐλισὰ
Tarshish	תַרְשִׁ֑ישׁ	Θάρσεις
Kittim	כִּתִּ֖ים	Κίτιοι
Dodanim	דֹדָנִֽים	Ρόδιοι

We will let you sort out all the potential language names for our model. This is nothing more than a family genealogy, most likely kept by a single family member. The only reason to suspect anything more than a family genealogy is the notation:

“By these were the isles[20] of the Nations[21] divided in their lands; every one after his tongue, after their families, in their nations (גוֹיֵהֶֽם | ἔθνεσιν).”[22] — Genesis 10:5

From this point on, the Japheth tribes appear to migrate north and west, into Europe and northern Europe, as well as possibly eastward into India, away from the visual field of Genesis.[23] “Out of sight; out of mind.” At this point in our present knowledge, there are many additional tribal developments that we simply cannot connect at all. It comes as no surprise then, that there are many languages and nations on earth that defy any reasonable biblical connection. This does not mean that such a connection does not exist, it only means that we are ignorant of any method of making such a connection accurately.

Ham

The ancestral line of Ham passes on four lines: Cush (כּ֥וּשׁ | Χοὺς), Mizraim (מִצְרַ֖יִם | Μερσαΐν), Phut (פ֥וּט | Φοὺδ), Canaan (כְנָֽעַן | Χαναάν).

Name	Hebrew	Greek	Language
Ham	חָ֥ם	Χάμ	Hamitic
Cush	כּ֥וּשׁ	Χοὺς
Mizraim	מִצְרַ֖יִם	Μερσαΐν
Phut	פ֥וּט	Φοὺδ
Canaan	כְנָֽעַן	Χαναάν

Cush

Name	Hebrew	Greek	Language
Cush	כּ֥וּשׁ	Χοὺς
Seba	סְבָא֙	Σαβὰ
Havilah	חֲוִילָ֔ה	Εὐϊλὰ
Sabtah	סַבְתָּ֥ה	Σαβαθὰ
Raamah	רַעְמָ֖ה	Ρεγμὰ
Sabtechah	סַבְתְּכָ֑א	Σαβαθακά
Nimrod	נִמְרֹ֑ד	Νεβρώδ
—	—	—	—
S(h)eba	שְׁבָ֥א	Σαβὰ
Dedan	דְדָֽן	Δαδάν

Nimrod

Nimrod creates at least two problems for us: First, Nimrod disrupts Mesopotamian culture by war. Second, Nimrod bequeaths cities rather than children. We do not know if these are eponyms, toponyms, or tribes he conquered and subjugated: Babel (בָּבֶ֔ל | Βαβυλὼν), Erech (אֶ֖רֶךְ | Ορὲχ), Accad (אַכַּ֣ד | Αρχὰδ)[26], and Calneh (כַלְנֵ֑ה | Χαλάννη), in the land of Shinar (שִׁנְעָֽר | Σεναάρ)[27]. However, it does appear that at least some of these cities or city-states did develop their own languages.

Name	Hebrew	Greek	Language
Nimrod	נִמְרֹ֑ד	Νεβρώδ
Babel	בָּבֶ֔ל	Βαβυλὼν
Erech	אֶ֖רֶךְ	Ορὲχ
Accad	אַכַּ֣ד	Αρχὰδ	Akkadian?[28]
Calneh	כַלְנֵ֑ה	Χαλάννη
Shinar	שִׁנְעָֽר	Σεναάρ	Sumerian?[29]

Nimrod caused Asshur (אַשּׁ֑וּר | Ἀσσοὺρ), who was Semitic, to migrate building Nineveh (נִ֣ינְוֵ֔ה | Νινευΐ), Rehoboth (רְחֹבֹ֥ת | Ροωβὼθ), and Calah (כָּֽלַח | Χαλὰχ). So now it appears that two kingdoms or empires or leagues of city-states are in direct competition.

Name	Hebrew	Greek	Language
Asshur	אַשּׁ֑וּר	Ἀσσοὺρ
Nineveh	נִ֣ינְוֵ֔ה	Νινευΐ
Rehoboth	רְחֹבֹ֥ת	Ροωβὼθ
Calah	כָּֽלַח	Χαλὰχ

Mizraim

Mizraim[30] spawns six to eight lines: Ludim (לוּדִ֧ים | Λουδιεὶμ)[31], Anamim (עֲנָמִ֛ים | Ἐνεμετιεὶμ), Lehabim (לְהָבִ֖ים | Λαβιεὶμ), Naphtuhim (נַפְתֻּחִֽים | Νεφθαλιεὶμ), Pathrusim (פַּתְרֻסִ֞ים | Πατροσωνιεὶμ), Casluhim (כַּסְלֻחִ֗ים | Χασλωνιείμ): from whom came Philistim (פְּלִשְׁתִּ֖ים | Φυλιστιείμ) and Caphtorim (כַּפְתֹּרִֽים | Καφθοριείμ). We are not sure if the Philistines are direct descendants, intermarriages, or treaty relationships, possibly with Japhethites.

Name	Hebrew	Greek	Language
Mizraim	מִצְרַ֖יִם	Μερσαΐν
Ludim	לוּדִ֧ים	Λουδιεὶμ
Anamim	עֲנָמִ֛ים	Ἐνεμετιεὶμ
Lehabim	לְהָבִ֖ים	Λαβιεὶμ
Naphtuhim	נַפְתֻּחִֽים	Νεφθαλιεὶμ
Pathrusim	פַּתְרֻסִ֞ים	Πατροσωνιεὶμ
Casluhim	כַּסְלֻחִ֗ים	Χασλωνιείμ
—	—	—	—
Philistim	פְּלִשְׁתִּ֖ים	Φυλιστιείμ
Caphtorim	כַּפְתֹּרִֽים	Καφθοριείμ

Phut

We have no further genealogy for Phut.[32] This does not mean that no such genealogy exists, it only means that any such genealogy is lost to us in the Bible.

Canaan

From this point on, the Ham tribes appear to migrate south and west, into Africa as well as southern and western Africa; yet, historic circumstances keep some of the Ham tribes more in touch with the Shem tribes. Still, we have whole developments in southern and western Africa for which we have no connection whatsoever.

Name	Hebrew	Greek	Language
Canaan	כְנָֽעַן	Χαναάν
Sidon	צִידֹ֥ן	Σιδῶνα
Heth	חֵֽת	Χετταῖον	Hittite
Jebusite	יְבוּסִי֙	Ἰεβουσαῖον
Amorite	אֱמֹרִ֔י	Ἀμορραῖον
Girgasite	גִּרְגָּשִֽׁי	Γεργεσαῖον
Hivite	חִוִּ֥י	Εὐαῖον
Arkite	עַרְקִ֖י	Ἀρουκαῖον
Sinite	סִּינִֽי	Ἀσενναῖον
Arvadite	אַרְוָדִ֥י	Ἀράδιον
Zemarite	צְּמָרִ֖י	Σαμαραῖον
Hamathite	חֲמָתִ֑י	Ἀμαθί

Names other than Shem, Ham, and Japheth are becoming recognizable: Canaan, Seba (possibly Sheba or Sabaean)[37], Babel (Babylon), Accad (Akkad), Shinar (Sumer), Asshur (Assyria), Philistim (Philistine), and Sidon (possibly the first Phoenician city). Several of these will emerge as great empires, cultures, and languages: particularly, Sumerian and Akkadian, which are very well known and dominant. Ironically, Mizraim remains a mystery.[38]

Shem

Name	Hebrew	Greek	Language
Shem	שֵׁ֖ם	Σήμ	Semitic
Elam	עֵילָ֣ם	Ἐλὰμ	Elamite[40]
Asshur	אַשּׁ֑וּר	Ἀσσοὺρ
Arphaxad	אַרְפַּכְשַׁ֖ד	Ἀρφαξὰδ
Lud	ל֥וּד	Λοὺδ
Aram	אֲרָֽם	Ἀρὰμ	Aramaic[41]
Cainan	???	Καϊνᾶν

The Elamites appear to migrate east across the Tigris River into what is part of modern Iran. For the time being, they will disappear from the biblical scope of history. Asshur drifts into northern Mesopotamia. Arphaxad seems cut adrift; yet will return to the forefront in the continuing line of Abram.[42] Lud disappears from view, possibly into Anatolia as the Lydians or Luwians.

Aram

Aram generates: Uz (ע֥וּץ | Οὒζ), Hul (ח֖וּל | Οὒλ), Gether (גֶ֥תֶר | Γατὲρ), Mash (מַֽשׁ | Μοσόχ).

Name	Hebrew	Greek	Language
Aram	אֲרָֽם	Ἀρὰμ	Aramaic
Uz	ע֥וּץ	Οὒζ
Hul	ח֖וּל	Οὒλ
Gether	גֶ֥תֶר	Γατὲρ
Mash	מַֽשׁ	Μοσόχ

Arphaxad

Arphaxad begins the descending line: Cainan (??? | Καϊνᾶν), Salah (שָׁ֑לַח | Σαλά), Eber (עֵֽבֶר | Ἕβερ), the brothers Peleg (פֶּ֗לֶג | Φαλέγ) and Joktan (יָקְטָֽן | Ἰεκτάν). Here we have a second indication of massive cultural disruption besides that of Nimrod. This reinforces the idea that Asshur is Semitic and was forced to migrate by Nimrod. We also observe that Asshur and Aram are distinct, a fact missed by later Greek historians; yet, not missed by Jews writing in Greek.

“Peleg: for in his days was the earth divided.” — Genesis 10:25

Name	Hebrew	Greek	Language
Arphaxad	אַרְפַּכְשַׁ֖ד	Ἀρφαξὰδ
Cainan	???	Καϊνᾶν
Salah	שָׁ֑לַח	Σαλά
Eber	עֵֽבֶר	Ἕβερ	Hebrew
Peleg	פֶּ֗לֶג	Φαλέγ
Joktan	יָקְטָֽן	Ἰεκτάν

Joktan

This account intends to emphasize the Hebrews[47]:

“Unto Shem also, the father of all the children of Eber, the brother of Japheth the elder[48], even to him children were born.” — Genesis 10:21

Name	Hebrew	Greek	Language
Joktan	יָקְטָֽן	Ἰεκτάν
Almodad	אַלְמוֹדָ֖ד	Ἐλμωδὰδ
S(h)eleph	שָׁ֑לֶף	Σαλὲθ
Hazarmaveth	חֲצַרְמָ֖וֶת	Σαρμὼθ
Jerah	יָֽרַח	Ἰαρὰχ
Hadoram	הֲדוֹרָ֥ם	Ὁδορρὰ
Uzal	אוּזָ֖ל	Αἰβὴλ
Diklah	דִּקְלָֽה	Δεκλὰ
Obal	עוֹבָ֥ל	Εὐὰλ
Abimael	אֲבִֽימָאֵ֖ל	Ἀβιμαὲλ
Sheba	שְׁבָֽא	Σαβὰ
Ophir	אוֹפִ֥ר	Οὐφεὶρ
Havilah	חֲוִילָ֖ה	Εὐειλὰ
Jobab	יוֹבָ֑ב	Ἰωβάβ

We face the enigmatic statement:

“The whole earth was of one language, and of one speech. It came to pass, as they journeyed from the east, that they found a plain in the land of Shinar; and they settled there. So they said one to another, ‘Go, let us make brick, and burn them thoroughly.’ Thus they had brick for stone, and slime for mortar.[49] Then they said, ‘Go, let us build a city and a tower, whose top may reach to heaven; and let us make us a name, lest we be scattered abroad upon the face of the whole earth.’ ” — Genesis 11:1-4

“The whole earth was of one language:” because the writer has returned to Noah, as he indicates in Genesis 10:32, the previous verse. There is no reason in this phrase either to deny the ongoing development of languages and dialects; or to see contradiction with verses like Genesis 10:5, 20, 31, or 32. What we do see here is the same growing arrogant rebellion against God that dwelt in the heart of Nimrod.

Now we have a third statement indicating massive cultural disruption.

“The Lord came down to see the city and the tower, which the children of men built. The Lord said, ‘See, this people are united, they have all one language, this is what they begin to do, and now nothing will be limited to them, which they have imagined to do. So, let us go down, and confound their language, in order that they may not understand one another's speech.’ So, the Lord scattered them abroad from there, over the face of the whole earth: and they ceased building the city.” — Genesis 11:5-8

This is not the next sequential act. This is an analytical report about Nimrod’s behavior from the Lord’s point of view. Nimrod’s first city was Babel (Βαβυλὼν or Σύγχυσις, which means Confusion), so Ancient Babylon is the most likely site of the incident. The Jewish translators translated the name into its Greek meaning, rather than transliterating it into Greek sounds as previously: thus indicating that the action was more important than the location. This also indicates an activity closer to the beginning of Nimrod’s reign of terror. The development of dialects has been going on naturally for some time; what God confounds is Nimrod’s attempted forced standardization; nevertheless, two languages will continue to dominate, at least in Mesopotamia, if not in the rest of the known world: Sumerian and Akkadian.[50] Nimrod’s wicked actions result in massive migrations away from Mesopotamia, in which Abram will participate.[51] None of this detracts in the least from the Lord’s miraculous intervention which is reported here: most often this is the result of God’s moving men’s minds to do his will. There is more to this story than meets they eye: Nimrod is waging war on the kingdom of God, and God is dealing with Nimrod.

Peleg

the descending line of Arphaxad continues after Peleg: Reu (רְעֽוּ | Ραγαῦ), Serug (שְׂרֽוּג | Σερούχ), Nahor the elder (נָחֽוֹר | Ναχώρ), Terah (תָּֽרַח | Θάρα).

Name	Hebrew	Greek	Language
Peleg	פֶּ֗לֶג	Φαλέγ
Reu	רְעֽוּ	Ραγαῦ
Serug	שְׂרֽוּג	Σερούχ
Nahor	נָחֽוֹר	Ναχώρ
Terah	תָּֽרַח	Θάρα

Terah

Name	Hebrew	Greek	Language
Terah	תָּֽרַח	Θάρα
Abram	אַבְרָ֔ם	Ἅβραμ
Nahor	נָח֖וֹר	Ναχώρ
Haran	הָרָֽן	Ἀρράν
—	—	—	—
Lot	לֽוֹט	Λώτ
Milcah	מִלְכָּ֖ה	Μελχά
Iscah	יִסְכָּֽה	Ἰεσχά

“Haran died before his father Terah in the land of his birth, in Ur [the country][52] of the Chaldees.” Genesis 11:28

Abram married Sarai (שָׂרָ֔י | Σάρα). Nahor married Milcah, his niece.

“Terah took Abram his son, and Lot the son of Haran his son’s son, and Sarai his daughter-in-law, his son Abram’s wife; and they went forth with them from Ur [the land][53] of the Chaldees, to go into the land of Canaan; and they came unto Haran, and dwelt there.” — Genesis 11:31

At this point[54] the genealogy breaks down to be dominated by narrative. It is this literary transition that leads us to believe that Abram/Abraham is at least the true author of Genesis 10 and 11. Lot separated from Abram; then dwelled in Sodom with his wife and two daughters. War broke out again: the major participants are included here because of their potential influence on linguistics.[55] However, these verses are somewhat indecipherable.

Name	Hebrew	Greek	Language
Amraphel	אַמְרָפֶ֣ל	Ἀμαρφὰλ
Shinar	שִׁנְעָ֔ר	Σενναάρ
Arioch	אַרְי֖וֹךְ	Ἀριὼχ
Ellasar (Larsa?)	אֶלָּסָ֑ר	Ἐλλασάρ
Chedorlaomer	כְּדָרְלָעֹ֙מֶר֙	Χοδολλογομὸρ
Elam	עֵילָ֔ם	Ἐλὰμ
Tidal	תִדְעָ֖ל	Θαργὰλ
Nations	גּוֹיִֽם	Ἐθνῶν
—	—	—	—
Bera	בֶּ֙רַע֙	Βαλλὰ
Sodom	סְדֹ֔ם	Σοδόμων
Birsha	בִּרְשַׁ֖ע	Βαρσὰ
Gomorrah	עֲמֹרָ֑ה	Γομόρρας
Shinab	שִׁנְאָ֣ב	Σενναὰρ
Admah	אַדְמָ֗ה	Ἀδαμὰ
Shemeber	שֶׁמְאֵ֙בֶר֙	Συμοβὸρ
Zeboiim	׳צְבֹיִים "צְבוֹיִ֔ים"	Σεβωείμ
Bela	בֶּ֖לַע	Βαλάκ
Zoar	צֹֽעַר	Σηγώρ
—	—	—	—
Rephaim	רְפָאִים֙	γίγαντας
Ashteroth Karnaim	עַשְׁתְּרֹ֣ת קַרְנַ֔יִם	Ἀσταρὼθ Καρναΐν
Zuzims	זּוּזִ֖ים	Ἔθνη
Ham	הָ֑ם	Ἅμα
Emins	אֵימִ֔ים	Ὀμμαίους
Shaveh Kiriathaim	שָׁוֵ֖ה קִרְיָתָֽיִם	Σαυῇ
Horites	חֹרִ֖י	Χορραίους
Seir	הַרְרָ֣ם שֵׂעִ֑יר	Σηείρ
Elparan	פָּארָ֔ן	Φαράν
—	—	—	—
Amalekites	עֲמָלֵקִ֑י	Ἀμαλὴκ
Enmishpat Kadesh	עֵ֤ינ מִשְׁפָּט֙ קָדֵ֔שׁ	Κάδης
Amorites	אֱמֹרִ֔י	Ἀμορραίους
Hazezontamar	חַֽצְצֹ֥נ תָּמָֽר	Ἀσασονθαμάρ
—	—	—	—
Siddim	שִּׂדִּֽים	ἁλυκῇ (salt)
Mamre	מַמְרֵ֣א	Μαμβρῇ
Eshcol	אֶשְׁכֹּל֙	Ἐσχὼλ
Aner	עָנֵ֔ר	Αὐνάν
Dan	דָּֽן	Δάν
Hobah	חוֹבָ֔ה	Χοβά
Damascus	דַמָּֽשֶׂק	Δαμασκοῦ
Shaveh	שָׁוֵ֔ה	Σαβύ
Melchizedek	מַלְכִּי־צֶ֙דֶק֙	Μελχισεδὲκ
Salem	שָׁלֵ֔ם	Σαλὴμ

Taxation

In spite of the difficulties and confusion over this list of names, the war itself, over taxes and tributes creates some fresh convictions concerning language development. It is commonly believed and taught that the book of Genesis is entirely oral tradition. We now have two lines of evidence showing that this cannot be true.

Our first line of evidence consists of the fact that oral tradition was not a method widely in use: writing was. We have at this time in history, well developed international languages in use: Sumerian, Akkadian, and possible Elamite, to name a few. Egyptian (2600-on), Hittite (1600-on), and the Indo-European family are less identifiable biblically, yet still actively present on the world stage.[56] We are not discussing here, a few scattered documents. We are talking about libraries filled with thousands upon thousands of documents. As I understand the problem, we lack the epigraphic skills to crack the code for many of these. We are talking about everything from fairly ordinary records to a highly developed literature. These ancient civilizations were simply not dependent on oral tradition.

Our second line of evidence comes from this tax and tribute war. From Nimrod’s first city-state, alliance of city-states, empire, or whatever name can be attached to such an endeavor, and its competition, we have the growing expectation that such endeavors could not possibly be administered without a written mechanism for taxation. Somebody kept birth records, death records, marriages, and other necessary vital statistics. Somebody kept records of locations and property ownership, especially herds. The idea that tax steward A, located taxpayer X one year, took a detailed census of all family members, property, and live stock, committing it all to memory; while the very next year tax steward B, approached taxpayer X for a fresh assessment of these details to determine the lawful tax; and this was done for hundreds of thousands of people: this very idea is preposterous. The legal battles over faulty memory would baffle the bravest of people. This legal argument stands on these two feet: first, the immensity of the problem, taxation is impossible with which to humanly cope from oral tradition; and second, indisputable tax agreement cannot be reached on the basis of oral records. We cannot and do not believe that this was ever remembered based on oral tradition. Far more plausible is the idea that Abraham’s family records, along with the records of countless others, were meticulously kept at a central seat of law in Ur, and Abraham and his family kept their own essential record files. They might have had to hire a professional scribe to maintain such records; yet, keep them they surely did. This is not mere conjecture; these passages show that such taxes were required; judging from the participants they were in effect for all Mesopotamia, as well as cis-Jordan, and trans-Jordan.

In looking for such records, one language probability stands out from all others. Abraham is from Ur of the Chaldees, a Semitic state, and the exceedingly great likelihood is that Abraham, a Semitic person, filed and kept such records in the Semitic language in common use at that time, which was Akkadian.[57]

Lot

Meanwhile, Abram and Sarai, in a lapse of faith, conspired with Hagar (הָגָ֛ר | Ἄγαρ) to produce Is(h)mael (יִשְׁמָעֵֽאל | Ἰσμαήλ), from whom the Ishmaelite nation sprang.[58] The Lord gave Abram and Sarai new names, Abraham (אַבְרָהָ֔ם | Ἁβραὰμ) and Sarah (שְׁמָֽהּ | Σάρρα), as well as renewed promises. Lot’s wife died, after which he had incestuous relationship with his daughters, which resulted in the birth of two sons Moab (מוֹאָ֑ב | Μωὰβ) and Ammi (עַמִּ֑י | Ἀμμάν)[59] who later became the Moabite and Ammonite nations.

Name	Hebrew	Greek	Language
Lot	לֽוֹט	Λώτ
Moab	מוֹאָ֑ב	Μωὰβ	Moabite
Ammi	עַמִּ֑י	Ἀμμάν	Ammonite

Abraham

Name	Hebrew	Greek	Language
Abram	אַבְרָ֔ם	Ἅβραμ
Childlessness of Abram and Sarai
steward?	בֶן־מֶ֣שֶׁק	υἱὸς Μασὲκ
Eliezer	אֱלִיעֶֽזֶר	Ελιέζερ
Damascus	דַּמֶּ֥שֶׂק	Δαμασκὸς
Ur	א֣וּר	???
Chaldees	כַּשְׂדִּ֔ים	Χαλδαίων	Chaldean[60]
New Peoples Promised to Abram
Kenites	קֵּינִי֙	Κεναίους
Kenizzites	הַקְּנִזִּ֔י	Κενεζαίους
Kadmonites	קַּדְמֹנִֽי	Κεδμωναίους
Hittites	חִתִּ֥י	Χετταίους	Hittite[61]
Perizzites	פְּרִזִּ֖י	Φερεζαίους
Evites	???	Εὐαίους
Girgashites	גִּרְגָּשִׁ֖י	Γεργεσαίους
Jebusites	יְבוּסִֽי	Ἰεβουσαίους
Abram by Hagar
Egyptian	מִצְרִ֖ית	Αἰγυπτία	Egyptian[62]
Hagar	הָגָֽר	Ἄγαρ
Ishmael	יִשְׁמָעֵֽאל	Ἰσμαήλ
New Names Given to Abram and Sarai
Abraham	אַבְרָהָ֔ם	Ἁβραὰμ
Sarah	שְׁמָֽהּ	Σάρρα
Abraham by Sarah
Isaac	יִצְחָֽק	Ἰσαάκ
Abraham by Keturah
Keturah	קְטוּרָֽה	Χεττούρα
Zimran	זִמְרָן֙	Ζομβρᾶν
Jokshan	יָקְשָׁ֔ן	Ἰεζὰν
Medan	מְדָ֖ן	Μαδὰλ
Midian	מִדְיָ֑ן	Μαδιὰμ
Ishbak	יִשְׁבָּ֖ק	Ἰεσβὼκ
Shuah	שֽׁוּחַ	Σωκέ
—	—	—	—
Sheba	שְׁבָ֖א	Θαιμὰν τὸν Σαβὰ
Dedan	דְּדָ֑ן	Δεδάν
—	—	—	—
???	???	Ραγουὴλ
???	???	Ναβδεὴλ
Asshurim	אַשּׁוּרִ֥ם	Ἀσσουριεὶμ
Letushim	לְטוּשִׁ֖ים	Λατουσιεὶμ
Leummim	לְאֻמִּֽים	Λαωμείμ
—	—	—	—
Ephah	עֵיפָ֤ה	Γεφὰρ
Epher	עֵ֙פֶר֙	Ἀφεὶρ
Hanoch	חֲנֹ֔ךְ	Ἐνὼχ
Abidah	אֲבִידָ֖ע	Ἀβειρὰ
Eldaah	אֶלְדָּעָ֑ה	Ἐλδαγά

Ishmael

Name	Hebrew	Greek	Language
Ishmael	יִשְׁמָעֵֽאל	Ἰσμαήλ
Nebajoth	נְבָיֹ֔ת	Ναβαιώθ
Kedar	קֵדָ֥ר	Κηδὰρ
Adbeel	אַדְבְּאֵ֖ל	Ναβδεὴλ
Mibsam	מִבְשָֽׂם	Μασσὰμ
Mishma	מִשְׁמָ֥ע	Μασμὰ
Dumah	דוּמָ֖ה	Δουμὰ
Massa	מַשָּֽׂא	Μασσῆ
Hadar	חֲדַ֣ד	Χοδδὰν
Tema	תֵימָ֔א	Θαιμὰν
Jetur	יְט֥וּר	Ἰετοὺρ
Naphish	נָפִ֖ישׁ	Ναφὲς
Kedemah	קֵֽדְמָה	Κεδμά

Isaac

Meanwhile, after Sarah’s death, Isaac took Rebekah (רִבְקָה֙ | Ρεβέκκα) for his wife: their sons were Esau (עֵשָֽׂו | Ἡσαῦ) and Jacob (יַעֲקֹ֑ב | Ἰακώβ).

Name	Hebrew	Greek	Language
Isaac	יִצְחָֽק	Ἰσαάκ
Rebekah	רִבְקָה֙	Ρεβέκκα
Esau	עֵשָֽׂו	Ἡσαῦ
Jacob	יַעֲקֹ֑ב	Ἰακώβ

Esau

Esau’s wives were Judith (יְהוּדִ֔ית | Ἰουδίθ), Bashemath (בָּ֣שְׂמַ֔ת | Βασεμάθ), both Hittites, and Mahalath (מָחֲלַ֣ת | Μαελὲθ), an Ishmaelite according to Genesis 26 and 28.[63] However, we will follow the somewhat different list provided in Genesis 36.

Name	Hebrew	Greek	Language
Esau Edom	עֵשָֽׂו אֱדֽוֹם	Ἡσαῦ Ἐδώμ	at Seir
Judith	יְהוּדִ֔ית	Ἰουδίθ	corrupt?
Bashemath	בָּ֣שְׂמַ֔ת	Βασεμάθ	Adah?
Mahalath	מָחֲלַ֣ת	Μαελὲθ	corrupt?
Adah	עָדָ֛ה	Ἀδὰ
Aholibamah	אָהֳלִֽיבָמָה֙	Ὀλιβεμὰ
Esau by Adah
Eliphaz	אֱלִיפָ֑ז	Ἐλιφάς
Eliphaz by ?
Teman	תֵּימָ֣ן	Θαιμάν
Omar	אוֹמָ֔ר	Ὠμάρ
Zepho	צְפ֥וֹ	Σωφάρ
Gatam	גַעְתָּ֖ם	Γοθὼμ
Kenaz	קְנַֽז	Κενέζ
Eliphaz by Timna
Timna	תִמְנַ֣ע	Θαμνὰ
Amalek	עֲמָלֵ֑ק	Ἀμαλήκ
Esau by Bashemath
Reuel	רְעוּאֵֽל	Ραγουήλ
Ruel by ?
Nahath	נַ֥חַת	Ναχόθ
Zerah	זֶ֖רַח	Ζαρέ
Shammah	שַׁמָּ֣ה	Σομέ
Mizzah	מִזָּ֑ה	Μοζέ
Esau by Aholibamah
Jeush	יְעִישׁ׳ יְע֥וּשׁ	Ἰεοὺς
Jaalam	יַעְלָ֖ם	Ἰεγλὸμ
Korah	קֹ֑רַח	Κορέ

In addition to all of these Esau associates himself with a great multitude of other tribes. While Jacob has become a large family, Esau has become a great nation. Small wonder, then, that Egyptologists reviewing the records of Egypt only see the national entity now known as Edom, or Edomites.[64] So, it is not so very strange that Israelites will be classed as a tribe of Edomites, and disappear out of sight from time to time. From this point on, we expect that the development of dialectical differences within Esau will be slight within the frame of reference we are considering. The assiduous linguist, on the other hand, will pry into every nook and cranny. We finish with Jacob.

Jacob

Jacob’s wives were Leah (לֵאָ֑ה | Λεία), Zilpah (זִלְפָּ֖ה | Ζελφὰν), Rachel (רָחֵל֙ | Ραχήλ), and Bilhah (בִּלְהָ֖ה | Βαλλὰν)

Name	Hebrew	Greek	Language
Jacob	יַעֲקֹ֑ב	Ἰακώβ
Leah	לֵאָ֑ה	Λεία
Zilpah	זִלְפָּ֖ה	Ζελφὰν
Rachel	רָחֵל֙	Ραχήλ
Bilhah	בִּלְהָ֖ה	Βαλλὰν
Jacob by Leah
Reuben	רְאוּבֵ֑ן	Ρουβὴν
Simeon	שִׁמְעֽוֹן	Συμεών
Levi	לֵוִֽי	Λευεί
Judah	יְהוּדָ֑ה	Ἰούδαν
—	—	—	—
Issachar	יִשָּׂשכָֽר	Ἰσσάχαρ
Zebulun	זְבֻלֽוּן	Ζαβουλών
Dinah	דִּינָֽה	Δείνα
Jacob by Bilhah
Dan	דָּֽן	Δάν
Naphtali	נַפְתָּלִֽי	Νεφθαλείμ
Jacob by Zilpah
Gad	גָּֽד	Γάδ
Asher	אָשֵֽׁר	Ἀσήρ
Jacob by Rachel
Joseph	יוֹסֵ֖ף	Ἰωσὴφ
Benoni Benjamin	בֶּן־אוֹנִ֑י בִנְיָמִֽין	Υἱὸς ὀδύνης μου Βενιαμίν	Gen 35:18 Son of my grief, pain, or sorrow
Jacob Renamed
Israel	יִשְׂרָאֵ֑ל	Ἰσραήλ

Joseph

Jacob will add two more tribes to his family by covenant adoption. These will replace Joseph, finishing out the number of tribes to exactly thirteen.

Name	Hebrew	Greek	Language
Joseph Zaphnath-paaneah	יוֹסֵ֖ף צָֽפְנַ֣ת פַּעְנֵחַ֒	Ἰωσὴφ Ψονθομφανήχ
Asenath	אָֽסְנַ֗ת	Ἀσεννὲθ
Manasseh	מְנַשֶּׁ֑ה	Μανασσῆ
Ephraim	אֶפְרָ֑יִם	Ἐφραΐμ

Summary

Any further developments along these lines, as far as our scope of investigation is concerned, is limited to other data we will find in the Bible. This data will develop internally to the tribes of either Esau (Edom) or Israel until we reach the times of Moses (1406-1366), which is our goal. We do not anticipate any massive changes in these two linguistic branches by the time of Moses. We have overlooked many place names (toponyms) along the way. If readers wish to pursue linguistics further, they will find it necessary to fill in all these tedious details, over which we have skipped so lightly, as if we had not a care in this world.

The concerned linguist will struggle to add language after language to this or a similar data base. We have added Hebrew and Greek to our English data base to demonstrate how we might go about weighing variations and sounds looking for connections between languages. Such vocalizations are far from being exact so we would play with the possible sounds a word could make, searching for connections.

Dodanim is such a word: for we can make a very good argument that this is a manuscript error; the word is Rodanim, most likely the island we know as Rhodes today. Rhodes is an easy one. There are thousands that we cannot so easily connect; yet, as you begin to search scholarly opinions, you will now have a feel for how difficult their work is. The connection of a single word may take decades of focused effort.

Sometimes we get really lucky. Finds like the Dibon Stele (ca. 840)[65] or the Behistun Inscription (522-486)[66] assist our cause greatly: because they are multilingual, and may enable us to crack the code of a whole new language, provide valuable new insights into the meanings of words, and otherwise speed our progress.

This demonstrates all over again that there is a shortage of skilled trained epigraphers and a lack of funding to support the work.

We have not investigated the origin of alphabetic languages: this is miles away from our expertise. Around 1300 alphabetic writing began to develop in the Levant in the form of Akkadian cuneiform alphabets, which is to say that the cuneiform strokes were used to define a sort of early alphabet.[67] These early developments were in the form of abjads, alphabets without vowel sounds.[68]

The Tel Zayit abjad (950)[69], the Gezer calendar (925)[70], and the Tel Dan stele (870-750)[71] provide valuable evidence that Paleo-Hebrew was in the early stages of invention, possibly as early as 1000. The rock found by Dan Rypma, and examined by Ron E. Tappy at Tel Zayit, was found in the wall of a town that may have been occupied since 1200. However, this is the earliest evidence that has been found, and no evidence of an established alphabetic Hebrew literature exists at any date before 1000. There are some tangencies between Ugaritic and Psalms. From another perspective, even David’s first language may not have been Hebrew.

Amarna

Around the years 1353-1334 an Egyptian pharaoh named Akhenaten or Amenhotep IV made a radical break with the Egyptian political and religious powers at Thebes. He established a new capital at Amarna, roughly 200 miles north of Thebes, erecting new buildings and monuments. He also may have established a new henotheistic religion based on the worship of Aten. Within two years of his death, everything at Amarna was abandoned; the power center returned to Thebes for a time (until ca. 1077), the standard polytheistic worship of Egypt was restored. This fluke of history provides a very exact window for linguistics. Cities in cis-Jordan, disturbed by a massive wave of immigration wrote letters to the pharaoh, requesting help with deliverance from the immigrating threat. These letters are written in Akkadian. These dates coincide perfectly with the Exodus (1406-1366); the wars of Joshua (1366-1356); and the ensuing settlement by the cis-Jordan tribes (1356-1200). More importantly, they reinforce the probability that Akkadian is the dominant international language in 14th century cis-Jordan; and that Moses most likely wrote in Akkadian.[72]

Working Hypotheses

We are confronted by two dramatically different working hypotheses that explain these strange linguistics, especially the fact that there is no evidence that the alphabetic language Paleo-Hebrew or Hebrew existed before 1000 BC.

One hypothesis suggests that all the events of Torah are written in stages at around 950, 850, 600, 500; that no historic person named Moses exists, or Moses is some sort of pseudonym; and that the events of Genesis were absorbed from Babylonian lore and adapted to Jewish theology after around 516.[73]

We believe that a more reasonable working hypothesis is that Moses is a real historic figure writing between 1406 and 1366 in Akkadian. He most likely had in his possession Akkadian documents handed down within the Israelite family from Abraham, another real historic figure, which were also written in Akkadian. Moreover, Abraham had access to Akkadian library documents, so that he was able to research much of the Genesis information. With the invention of the Hebrew language around 1000 BC, these Akkadian documents were translated into Hebrew by Levite scribes. This, we believe is where we should focus our search for fresh supporting evidence.

Conclusions

Based on the complete lack of evidence for an early Hebrew alphabet, we form the tentative conclusion that Hebrew did not exist as a language in 1406-1366: it is very unlikely that Moses wrote Torah in Hebrew, that Joshua was written in Hebrew, or that the early records of Judges were kept in Hebrew. Most likely, Hebrew began to flourish as a language under the leadership of David when he organized the tabernacle service.

We reject the conclusion that such an absence of Hebrew provides proof for the theories of Wellhausen and other Documentary Hypothesis proponents. All of these hypotheses draw an unwarranted conclusion.

Based on the ample evidence that Akkadian cuneiform existed as the international language of choice from the period 1830 or earlier through well past 1366, we conclude that, at the very least, Moses, Joshua, and the early Judges all wrote in Akkadian; that these original Akkadian records, although translated into Hebrew as early as 950, date from the time of Moses (1406-1366), and truthfully recorded the historic data as we find it written.

We reject the notion that Moses received the entirety of Genesis in the form of oral tradition. It is humanly impossible to administrate the kinds of government entities in view in Genesis with oral tradition. It is absolutely necessary to the function of such governments that vital statistics, as well as tax records of crops, herds, and manufactured goods be kept in writing. The “Table of Nations”, found in Genesis 10, only makes sense as a family copy of such government records. The most likely custodians of such a record are Abraham, with his children: Abraham brought his copy of the important documents when he left Ur.

While we have no doubts about the veracity of any Akkadian documents produced by Moses, or even by Abraham. The fact that we must now reverse translate from Greek and Latin to Aramaic, from Aramaic to Hebrew, from Hebrew to Akkadian, makes hypothesizing an inerrant autograph that much more difficult, even a lost cause.

We have what we have because people along the way were faithful custodians and guardians of the Truth. This is the reality with which we all must deal.

[74]

[1] This means that, at the cusp of nascent PPNA culture, man was already writing; Cave-dwelling Stone Age man has probably been writing for a while on the pages of pre-history. Pre-history, only because we are not certain how or if its records have any documentary sense of organization. Ironically, “scholars” once claimed that Moses could not have written Torah (1406-1366), because writing was unknown in Moses’ day (1486-1366).

7000 BC: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Proto-writing

3200 BC: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_writing

[2] Some of these made up names sound pretty silly; so, feel free to change them as you wish or create your own language indicators: lip and tongue are both found in the Bible. This is not a claim that Adam and Eve wrote: only that they spoke.

[3] The Jews rarely made any attempt to translate these names for the prototypical Septuagint; they simply transliterated them to yield the best sounds. This may give us some insight into correct Hebrew vocalization, Hebrew text criticism, and the Hebrew dialect of Greek. Εὔαν, the form found at Genesis 4:1, is the accusative singular; hence, the name is Εὔα. The presence of translation indicates that a name is not indicated; transliteration signals that a name is more likely in play.

[4] The MT almost certainly botched Yethath’s name.

[5] The man’s name is תֽוֺבַל. His ancestral name is simply suffixed for no apparent reason, unless it is to clarify a distinction with the Thobel who lived after the flood: most likely a late Jewish scribe added it prior to 382, since it is found in the Vulgate. Note that we have removed the dagesh lene from the center of the tav and changed šûreq to ḥōlem vav. This yields the name Thobal, or shortening the short “a” even farther, Thobel as in Greek. The Greek vocalization precedes the Niqqud by at least seven hundred years.

Niqqud (500 or later): https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Niqqud

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pronunciation_of_English_%E2%9F%A8a%E2%9F%A9

[6] As the families drifted father and farther apart, the author simply lost track of them, or cultural differences, religious factors, and the like estranged them from each other. Whatever the causes, the record ends here. It remains to be seen if we will be able to pick up that record again later. We have no special reason for believing that no other generations passed prior to the flood: we simply do not know.

[7] Sem in both Greek and Hebrew, not Shem, except in English.

[8] Cham in both Greek and Hebrew, not Ham, except in English.

[9] Iafeth in both Greek and Hebrew, not Japheth, except in English.

[10] We note with considerable certainty that Noah himself is already well advanced beyond PPNB culture. Extant PPNA and PPNB settlements may be throwbacks caused by the general collapse of civilization. This suggests placing the Flood prior to 10,000 BC.

On the other hand, we cannot completely rule out the possibility that the Flood was only global from a Mesopotamian perspective: Noah and his posterity faithfully reported what they observed, it looked global, they were unaware of other survivors, God did keep them from harm. This raises the possibility that cave-dweller Stone Age settlements thought to exist prior to PPNA and PPNB (for example: on Crete) are actually Antediluvian. What we have established here, is not that Noah rendered a false report. What we have established is that we don’t have a very good understanding of what Noah faithfully said.

This is not a concession that anything based on sedimentary layering approaches an absolute chronology at all. Sedimentary layering presents a relative chronology in which the rate of sedimentation is mostly unknown and widely variant. For the most part, sedimentary dating has no known scientific controls, such as those from C-14 dating. Moreover, sedimentary layers have been widely disturbed by tectonic plate movement. So we may say, with some confidence, that fossil A is older than fossil B; we have no means of assigning a real date to fossil A or B. If no organic matter is retained with the fossil, as is almost always the case, C-14 dating is impossible. We repeat: it is absolutely impossible to perform C-14 dating without the presence of uncontaminated, surviving organic matter. This is the same problem that confronts us in pottery dating: we get relative, not absolute results. Still, in pottery dating, we occasionally are lucky enough to find a C-14 connection.

As far as sedimentary dating is concerned, we are adrift in a sea, where our pool of ignorance outweighs by many magnitudes, what we think we know, which really amounts to only a few droplets of information.

[11] Note that the classification now known as Afro-asiatic corresponds loosely with what we know as an aggregate of Hamitic and Semitic. The existence of other language families is best explained by Babel.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Afroasiatic_languages

Possibly Japhetic:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Indo-European_languages

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sino-Tibetan_languages

Possibly Hamitic:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Niger%E2%80%93Congo_languages

[12] Opinions range widely on this subject. While we ourselves may hold strong views on the subject; the fact is that there is not a lot of evidence, and we don’t understand all the evidence we have. As a result we are very far away from certainty. Here are some opinions:

http://mentalfloss.com/article/59665/feast-your-eyes-beautiful-linguistic-family-tree

https://triangulations.files.wordpress.com/2010/01/language-tree.gif

http://www.digibarn.com/stories/desktop-history/compyear-bushytree1970m.gif

http://www.digibarn.com/collections/posters/tongues/ComputerLanguagesChart-med.png

As well as more sober approaches, such as:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_language_families

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Language_family#Proto-languages

These differences of opinion do not mean than any of them or the Bible are wrong. They simply mean that we no longer know how to make all the connections. We either don’t have the evidence, don’t know how to decode the evidence, or don’t know how to correctly interpret the evidence we have.

[13] Genesis is a sort of a report, of a report, of a report… of a report. None of these reports are known to exist. So, at best, we have hearsay evidence, oral tradition is hearsay evidence by definition: so unless we can destroy the idea of oral tradition, so commonly held among us, we are stuck with hearsay evidence. This is not to say that what we do have in the Bible is wrong in any way. Yet, without other evidence it is very hard to pin down what the Bible actually means. If we have had incredible difficulty understanding the history of the Judges or the Kings, where we do have other evidence: how much greater the problem where we do not have so much as a straw to enrich our meaning. We are not supporting the claim that Genesis is entirely oral tradition. We believe that large portions of Genesis are necessarily rooted in written historic documents. The problem is not that we don’t believe in such historic documents, the problem is that we can’t locate such documents; if we accidently do have these documents, we don’t know it, can’t decode them, don’t know how to read them: so, yes, such documents could be hidden in plain sight.

[14] So, for example, “Thales (624-546) explained [earthquakes] by hypothesizing that the Earth floats on water and that earthquakes occur when the Earth is rocked by waves.” It is difficult to accuse Thales of being dependent or influenced by Israelite-Jewish philosophy in any way. That being said, Thales is reported to be of Phoenician extraction, so it is impossible to deny any possibility of connection of ideas through Solomon (970-930): even though the Akkadian, Hebrew, Greek, and other language barriers may have been formidable. Still, Thales uses methods of deductive logic, not known to be common among Israelites or Jews.

The attribution of science to Thales is a bit farfetched: science is a distinctly inductive or even abductive means of thinking; whereas, Thales is deductive. Nevertheless, Thales’ hypothesis that “Earth floats on water” opens the door to the idea that the tectonic plates were partially supported by hydraulic water forces, or at least once were. The idea does not reduce to absurdity when one realizes the power relationship between tsunami and earthquake, or between waste water disposal and earthquake. The known presence of vast amounts of underground water, necessitates an idea of porous rock or underground caverns, and even rivers. The undue movement of such waters does cause shifting of the tectonic plates. So, Thales was, in part, correct in his understanding that “Earth floats on water”. This fact that an immeasurable volume of underground water exists, prevents us from proving that the Flood was or was not universal due to a sufficiency or insufficiency of water to cover the earth.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thales_of_Miletus

[15] We are not commending conjectural emendation. We are proposing intense study of details to uncover new insights about the evidence that confronts us.

[16] The Greek text has an elder Elishah here (See Javan for the younger Elishah). One explanation could be that MT removes the name to make a perfect seven. It could also be a simple scribal error. Alternatively, Elishah could be listed twice, indicating that he was elevated to chief of his father’s inheritance.

[17] Ashkenazi Jews most likely settled among the tribes of Ashkenaz.

[18] We tentatively connect Tarshish to Sardinia and/or Spain because of the lead isotopes found in hack-silber; still, this is of little help with linguistics.

http://www.biblicalarchaeology.org/daily/archaeology-today/biblical-archaeology-topics/tarshish-hacksilber-hoards-pinpoint-solomons-silver-source/

https://opencontext.org/projects/CF179695-1E6A-440F-1DDB-4FEA7B02A5B5

http://www.ajaonline.org/author/2088

[19] Note that the difference between דֹדָנִֽים and רֹדָנִֽים is almost unnoticeable. רֹדָנִֽים (Rodanim) is certainly correct. These are the people who will inhabit the island of Rhodes in Greece.

[20] One has to wonder if this is a specific reference to the numerous Greek islands: including island-like mainland Greece, the Cyclades, Crete, Rhodes (the Dodanim), and Cyprus: especially since the term, isles, is not repeated in Genesis 10:20, 31, or 32.

[21] In addition to all of the other problems associated with this word, this has a further possibility of simply being an introductory remark. The exact word form is not repeated in the ensuing verses (Genesis 10:20, 31), until Genesis 10:32: so it may simply indicate that all the discussion of nations is to be gathered under this one main idea. Hence, it may be nothing more than a literary device to group everything in Genesis 10:1-32 under one topic. If this is the case, some of the difficulty in determining the exact meaning of the word in other forms, uses, and contexts may dissolve.

[22] We are cautious, not imposing modern meanings to these words. Lands, tongue, and family seem harmless enough; yet national structures are far from being clearly established. We note also that several dialects or languages are now in view. See also, Genesis 10:20, 31, 32. Goyim (the plural form) presents a further problem in that it carries at least four potential meanings: it is a particular nation named Nation (including the possibility that the writer did not know the proper name of the nation, so it was simply described as nations, the plural also possibly intentional – other nations); it is a specific set of nations — the Japhethites; it is the common word describing any nation, city-state, or alliance of city-states (a nation or the nations); it is a (frequently pejorative) class of people meaning anyone not Hebrew or Semitic, a gentile or heathen. The form in our text is (גוֹיֵהֶֽם) Goyehem: the suffix indicates the possessive pronoun, their. Goy itself simply indicates a body or person: yet, as with the English word, Yankee, a wide variety of connotative and implicit applications has lead to considerable clouding of the word’s meaning.

[23] This could explain the existence of the Indo-European language family. We might even anticipate some linguistic tangency with Indo-European languages, particularly Greek; yet, as far as we can discern, no such tangency has ever been identified other than that concerning Rhodes: this is strange, to say the least.

[24] Note the duplication here, between Saba the elder and younger, as well. The same sort of reasoning applies.

[25] Pronounced Nevrodth.

[26] Accad may be the source of the Akkadian languge.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Akkad_(city)

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Akkad_(region)

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Akkadian_Empire

[27] Possibly Sumer or Sumir, from which we might have the Sumerian language and culture.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sumer

[28] Akkadian is a Semitic language stemming from around 2500 BC.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Akkadian_Empire#Language

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Akkadian_language

[29] Sumerian is usually classed as a language isolate stemming from as early as 3000 BC. It appears to be a dead language from around 2000 BC, about the time of Abraham , continuing in use only as classical literature. Biblically it might be Hamitic, provided that we could equate Shinar with Sumer in absolute confidence, as well as link Shinar with Ham. We have no such confidence. The other problem with this is that Shinar is not a persons name, it seems to be an area designation. So until we have more information Sumerian must remain a language isolate.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sumerian_language

[30] Egypt: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Egypt

[31] Not likely Lubim or Libyans. We do not really know how to connect the ancestry of the Libyans and the Meshwesh, the two identifiable Berber tribes. Since Mizraim hated the Libu, it is difficult to believe that the Ludim are Libyans. The Meshwesh ultimately conquered Mizraim.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Libu

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Meshwesh

[32] Genesis 10:6; Ezekiel 27:10

[33] Phoenicia?

[34] Hittite?

[35] Jerusalem

[36] Hamath

[37] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sabaeans

^{^[38]} https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mizraim

[39] The name similarity may be merely coincidental. MT is known to modify text if it is socially embarrassing. Alternatively, this may be some sort of locative: i.e. when they dwelled in Cainan; intermarriage or other intertribal relationship.

[40] Elamite is usually classed as a language isolate stemming from as early as 2800 BC. Biblically it is seems to be Semitic and there are evidences that its written form derives from Akkadian. Elamite finds expression in the Achaemenid (Old Persian) Empire (550-330) and in Acts 2:8-9.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Elam

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Elam#Language

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Elamite_language

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Persian_language

[41] Aramaic is a Semitic language stemming from around 900 BC or earlier. It is one of the earliest alphabetic languages, which doubtless explains its rise in popularity. It replaces Akkadian, and is thought to be precursor to Hebrew.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aramaic_language

[42] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Assyrian_language

[43] The Greek, Σαρμὼθ, indicates that the correct spelling is closer to Zarmaveth. The first Hebrew letter being mistaken for, ה, the article: i.e. (חֲצַרְמָ֖וֶת | צַרְמָ֖וֶת הֲ).

[44] The best bet is that the spelling got slaughtered again: odds would favor the Greek. Αἰβὴλ might look like אֲבִֽיל in Hebrew.

[45] Εὐὰλ could look like עוָ֥ל in Hebrew.

[46] Possibly the guy or gal who married a Sabaean woman or man; or who settled among the Sabaeans.

[47] The reason for this emphasis may be to proclaim the Hebrew language, people, or both. This being said, Paleo-Hebrew will not begin to emerge as a language until 1000 BC, about the same time that Phoenician and Proto-Canaanite emerge, centuries after the death of Heber. We believe that the three alphabets are handwriting variations of the same language: Paleo-Hebrew, Phoenician, and Proto-Canaanite seem to us as the same language. There are Proto-Sinaitic scripts going back to 1800; still, there is little reason to call these alphabetic, and no reason to connect them directly to Paleo-Hebrew: new information could always be found, but current information is anything but conclusive. Hebrew itself will not emerge from Paleo-Hebrew until around the time of David.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Proto-Sinaitic_script

[48] Japheth was two years older than Shem.

[49] We are surprised by the claim for baked brick: for only sun dried brick is known in this period. This is most likely what the expression, “let us make brick, and burn them thoroughly,” means: make the best quality of sun dried brick.

We have Pre-Pottery, Neolithic A and B with which to contend, before we reach pottery development after the flood. Making quality baked pottery is itself a giant technological step; brick is magnitudes more difficult. Oven fired brick requires the development of a parallel development in oven technology. While such technology doubtless developed rapidly, there is no evidence of such technology in the earliest ziggurats. We conclude that “burned” (וְנִשְׂרְפָ֖ה לִשְׂרֵפָ֑ה | ὀπτήσωμεν αὐτὰς πυρί) probably means sun dried or baked: for the Rabbinic translators of 200 BC should not be expected to have technical mastery of the development of 2500 BC brick making, removed as they are from this experience by more than two millennia.

[50] Very likely, this states why God, in part, allowed languages to divide; rather than God caused all languages to divide. There seems to be a great deal of God’s permissive will in operation here; with God’s determined will applied primarily against those, such as Nimrod, who deliberately oppose the kingdom of God. As with many other things, it seems to be best explained as part miracle, and part providence.

[51] There is also, at least the suggestion that the family of Noah were not wise in their development. Crowding into southern Mesopotamia, they may have saturated the soil with salt, and depleted it of nutrients through bad agricultural practices, thus reducing the sustainable population density.

[52] The Jews of 200 BC took this to be a generic noun (χώρᾳ | dative singular: country, land); The Jews of 500 AD took it to be a proper noun (א֥וּר | Ur). Vulgate (ca. 382 AD) supports the proper noun.

^{^[53]} See the preceding note for (χώρας | genitive singular: country, land).

[54] Genesis 12:1

[55] This appears to be a war between a strange alliance of Hamites (Shinar), Semites (Elam), and Japhethites (Nations) and some rebellious Hamites. This division of loyalties is not as strange as it might first seem; when we remember that sexual sin only disgraced Canaan (Genesis 9:25), not the whole Hamite line. This family disgrace may also be a factor in the great mass migrations of the day: it could possibly explain how Hamite migration seems to precede Semite migration, so that Hamites first settle all of Africa and Cis-Jordan, while Semites appear to arrive later. The war itself fits against the context of Genesis 9:27. Sexual sin also explains later developments in Sodom.

[56] Linear A (2500-1450) will emerge in the Minoan civilization on Crete. Linear B (1450-1200) will continue on Crete, other Greek islands, and the Greek mainland. Neither Linear A or B are alphabetic languages: Linear A may be a mix of ideographic and syllabic language; Linear B is syllabic. Cypro-Minoan (1550-1050) appears to develop from Linear A on Cyprus. This makes any linguistic influence on biblical linguistics improbable prior to the development of copper mining on Cyprus (4000). Mycenaean (1600-1100) civilization begins to dominate Minoan civilization around 1450, while the impact of Mycenaean pottery is felt throughout Mediterranean culture, becoming the link for many dating problems. Since we date Moses at a fairly firm 1406 to 1366, this tentatively places the birth of Ishmael at around 1836 and the birth of Isaac around 1806. Thus, Abraham may have been influenced by copper traders; yet, there is little reason to believe that this changed his native first language from Ur.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Crete

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Linear_A

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Linear_B

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cypro-Minoan_syllabary

http://www.ancientscripts.com/cypriot.html

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Minoan_civilization

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mycenaean_Greece

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cyprus#Prehistoric_and_Ancient_Cyprus

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mining_industry_of_Cyprus

[57] Even so, this leaves us with no explanation for the development of Lorestan or Lurestan (8000-onward), the Kassite language, the Hurro-Urartian languages, or related cultural transitions from Elamites, Gutians, and Manneans to the Kassites and back to the Elamites. Nevertheless, this whole cultural set appears to thrive during the time of Abraham until the period of Philistine dominance and the invention of the Hebrew language around 1000, when it seems to disappear. The only reason that we don’t see this as a strong influence on language development in Mesopotamia, cis-Jordan, and trans-Jordan is that so little evidence survives; whereas, the surviving evidence for Akkadian amounts to mountains of information.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lorestan_Province

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kassites

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kassite_language

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hurro-Urartian_languages

[58] This is the first association we have found between Mizraim and Egypt.

[59] Ben is simply a prefix meaning son and is not part of the name. Amman is probably closer to the correct name.

[60] At the time of Abraham, this would be Akkadian. Later the Aramaic group of languages develops. Finally, the languages transition into Syriac, although Syriac may also stem from 900 BC. This language group seems more interwoven than sequential.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chaldean_Neo-Aramaic

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Syriac_language

[61] As early as 1600

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hittite_language

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Luwian_language

[62] The Egyptian language structure is very difficult to fathom: Old Egyptian (2600-2000), Middle Egyptian (2000-1300), Late Egyptian (1300-700), which are Hieratic or priestly systems; then Demotic, Coptic, and more.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Old_Egyptian_language

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Middle_Egyptian_language

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Late_Egyptian_language

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hieratic

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Demotic_(Egyptian)

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Coptic_language

[63] These are the names of Esau’s wives found in Genesis 26:34, and 28:9. However Genesis 36 gives different names and different parental lineages. Judith the daughter of Beeri the Hittite, becomes Aholibamah the daughter of Anah the daughter of Zibeon the Hivite. Bashemath the daughter of Elon the Hittite, becomes Adah the daughter of Elon the Hittite. Mahalath the daughter of Ishmael Abraham's son, the sister of Nebajoth, becomes Bashemath Ishmael's daughter, sister of Nebajoth. So the text is seriously corrupted. To make matters worse, the Greek text does not provide a better reading: so the corruption is in the text prior to 200 BC (so much for a hypothesis of inerrancy). We will resolve the problem by following Genesis 36, which is adequate for our purposes.

[64] The is an essential element of the Redford hypothesis of Exodus.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Donald_B._Redford

[65] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mesha_Stele

[66] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Behistun_Inscription

[67] For example, at Ugarit: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ugaritic_alphabet

[68] This article is a bit misleading: for it attributes alphabetic development to the second millennium. It should have said late second millennium: for the very first abjads do not appear until the dawn of the first millennium has almost arrived.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_the_alphabet

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abjad

[69] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zayit_Stone

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tel_Zayit

[70] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gezer_calendar

[71] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tel_Dan_Stele

[72] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Akhenaten

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Amarna_letters

[73] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Documentary_hypothesis

For example: Peter Machinist, Michael D. Coogan, et al. on NOVA, Secrets of Noah's Ark, http://www.pbs.org/video/2365577423/

[74] If you have been blessed or helped by any of these meditations, please repost, share, or use any of them as you wish. No rights are reserved. They are designed and intended for your free participation. They were freely received, and are freely given. No other permission is required for their use.

Bibliology

Friday, December 30, 2016

Linguistics

No comments:

Post a Comment

Blog Archive