Topics God & YHWH
My Name Forever
By Michael McHugh
מַה שְּׁמוֹ וּמַה שֶּׁם בְּנוֹ
is his Name,
is his Son's Name,
1. In the Hebrew Scriptures
“ יהוה ” represents the personal name of the Creator, the Elohim of
Israel. It is found there over 6,600 times.1 Often called the “Tetragram” or “Tetragrammaton”
(meaning roughly, "The Four Letters") by technical writers and lecturers,
this word, יהוה , is composed of the four letters
Yud י , Hei ה , Vav ו , and Hei ה . Do we know what it means or how to pronounce it? In most
Jewish and Christian circles it is not spoken. Jews call him in Hebrew, Adonai אֲדֹנָי (Lord),
or HaShem הַשֵּׁם (The Name), while
Christians use, “The LORD.”2 These
are titles. They are substitutions for his Name. But, why? Why is his Name
not used when speaking to him or about him? To answer this question we must
go to the Mishnah, which was compiled at the beginning of the third century.
Our answer lies there, in the so-called “Oral Torah” or “Oral Law”
which embodies Pharisaic/Rabbinic tradition from second Temple times.
Sanhedrin 10:1 All Israel have a portion in the world to come... BUT these are those
who have no portion in the world to come:
one who says that resurrection is not found in the Torah, one who says the
Torah is not from heaven, and an epicurean. R. Akiva says: one who reads the
uncanonical books and one who whispers [a charm] over a wound and says, (Exodus
15) “I will bring none of these diseases upon you which I brought upon the
Egyptians, for I am HaShem who heals you.” Abba Shaul says: Also one who Pronounces the Name according to its letters.3
2. This speaks for itself,
does it not? Among those who have no portion in the world to come, according
to the Rabbis, is he who pronounces the Name as it is written. It appears
that the Name was only allowed to be spoken by the priests in the temple courts
when they were blessing the people.
7:6 How is the Priestly Blessing done? In
the province they say it as three blessings, but in the temple as one blessing.
In the temple
he says the Name as it is written,4 but in the province, its pseudonym.
3. According to the Mishnah, when the “Priestly Blessing”
of Numbers 6:24-26 was recited over the people in the temple, the Name was
spoken as it was written. When the blessing was said outside the confines
of the temple courts, the “Pseudonym” was used. It is generally understood
that “Adonai” is the pseudonym to which reference is made but we know
that HaShem הַשֵּׁם (The Name) was
4. Why is the Name not spoken in Jewish and Christian
circles? Because the Rabbis have forbidden it. In so doing they violate the
Torah and disregard the will of the One who wants his Name mentioned in every
3:14-15 ... יהוה ...This is my Name forever,
and this is my Mention (“memorial” KJV) to all generations.
5. The Creator expressly states here that יהוה is his Name
forever. It is how he wants to be remembered or “mentioned” to all generations.
While “memorial” (as the King James Version renders the Hebrew zeikher זֵכֶר ) might be appropriate
for one who is dead, it is not fitting for him who is The Living One. The
word zeikher זֵכֶר , from the root Zayin Kaf
, conveys the thought that this is how he wants
his people to “call him to mind” or “mention” him.6 One specific way to mention him is to take our oaths
in his name. This is expected of us.
10:20 You shall fear יהוה your Elohim;
him shall you serve, and to him shall you cleave, and in his Name shall you
6. This instruction is for both houses of Israel as well
as the Gentile. It is valid for the native-born Hebrew and grafted-in Goy.
It is in force for all who would learn his ways and be his people.
12:16-17 “And it shall come to pass, if
they will diligently learn the ways of my people, to swear by my Name, ‘
as they taught my people to swear by Ba’al, then shall they be built in
the midst of my people. But if they will not listen, I will totally uproot
and destroy that nation,” says יהוה
7. So, how can we obey the Torah by mentioning his Name
and using his Name in our oaths if we are obeying the Rabbis who tell us not
to do so? It is obvious we can’t do both. We have to make a choice. Where
will our allegiance be? Will it be to the Torah or to the Rabbis? Should we
continue listening to those who set aside the commandments of the Almighty?
What does Isaiah say? What does Yeshua say?
8:20 To the Torah and to the testimony!
If they will not speak according to this word, they have no light.
29:13 Adonai has said, “Because this people
draw near with their mouth, and with their lips they honor me, but they have
removed their heart far from me, so that their fear toward me is the erudite commandment of men...”7
Tov's Hebrew Matthew 15:1-9 Then the sages
and the Pharisees came to Yeshua and said to him, “Why do your disciples
transgress the reforms of antiquity in that they do not wash their hands before
eating?” But Yeshua said to them, “And why do you transgress the words
of Elohim for the sake of your reforms?... You despise the words of Elohim by your reforms... Woe, hypocrites!
Behold Yeshayah prophesied of you, saying, ‘Thus says יהוה : Because this
people draw near with their mouth, and with their lips they honor me, but
they have removed their heart far from me, so that their fear toward me is
the erudite commandment of men...’”8
Tov’s Hebrew Matthew 23:2-3 The Pharisees
and sages sit in the seat of Moshe. So now, keep doing everything he tells
you, but do not do according to their reforms and precedents, for they talk and do not act.9
8. The practice of not saying the Name is one of the “reforms”
of the Rabbis. It is at variance with the Torah, it is at variance with the
Prophets and it is at variance with Messiah. This practice has, like Baal
worship, caused the people of Elohim and the world at large to forget his
Name.10 We cannot take back the lost ground, however, without
a systematic and objective approach to the whole subject and the will to make
a difference in our own spheres of influence. In order to approach it thus,
we’re going to have to examine and embrace the linguistic evidence we find
in the pages of the Tanakh, the Hebrew Scriptures.11
9. As you probably are already aware, the majority of
the Tanakh was written in the Hebrew language. It would seem logical, therefore,
to assume that the Creator’s Name, first encountered in a Hebrew context,
written to a Hebrew speaking audience, would be a Hebrew name. Many, surprisingly,
believe that the Name is “heavenly” in nature and therefore not a Hebrew
name at all. Such unverifiable subjectivity must be completely abandoned if
we are ever to get to the heart of the matter. The facts indicate that the
Creator’s Name is a Hebrew name. I am of the opinion that we shall discover
within the structure of the Hebrew language itself the form of this Name or
we shall not discover it at all.
10. Let’s start with the basics. When the Almighty first
revealed his Name to Moshe in Exodus 3:14 he explained it as signifying, "I
Am." This is extremely important as the meaning of the Name, “
will eventually lead us to its true pronunciation. Meaning and pronunciation
3:14-15 And Elohim said to Moshe, “I Am
That I Am.” And he said, “Thus shall you say to the sons of Yisra’el:
I AM has sent me to you.” And Elohim said moreover to Moses, “Thus shall
you say to the sons of Yisra’el: יהוה
the Elohim of your fathers, the Elohim of Avraham,
the Elohim of Yitzchak, and the Elohim of Ya’akov, has sent me to you. This
is my Name forever, and this is my Mention to all generations.
11. “I Am That I Am”
translates the phrase eh’yeh asher eh’yeh אֶהְיֶה אֲשֶׁר אֶהְיֶה . Eh’yeh אֶהְיֶה is
a verb of the Pa’al, or Kal, conjugation. We’ll discuss the seven conjugations
in more detail later. For now it is enough to know that this conjugation is
the simplest and conveys action in its simplest or most basic form.12 The root of this verb is Hei Yud Hei ה.י.ה. (
הָיָה ) and
has a basic meaning of, “to be, to exist.”13 The
at the beginning
of the three letter root signifies the imperfect or future tense, first person
singular - “I will...” The meaning of the root Hei Yud Hei ה.י.ה. (to be) taken
together with the Aleph א modifier at the beginning
(I will) signifies, “I will be,” or, “I am.”
12. Immediately after saying, “Eh’yeh אֶהְיֶה has sent me to you,” the Creator says, “
יהוה ... has
sent me to you.” This would seem to indicate that יהוה , like eh’yeh אֶהְיֶה
, is a verb. We should expect it to also be of
the Kal conjugation. The root of this verb is Hei Vav Hei ה.ו.ה. 14 and
has a basic meaning of, “to BREATH... hence, to live... and in the use of the language, to be, i.q. the common
word הָיָה .”15 The Yud י at the beginning of the three letter root signifies
the imperfect or future tense, third person singular - “He will...” The
meaning of the root Hei Vav Hei ה.ו.ה.
(to be) taken together with the Yud י modifier at the beginning (He will) signifies, “He
will be,” or, “He is.” Our search, then, is for how to say, “He will
be,” using the root Hei Vav Hei ה.ו.ה. .
13. What can we learn of how he wants to be mentioned from
Exodus 3:14? On the surface, it would appear, very little. But in actuality
we have already learned a great deal. By way of inference we have learned
that the Name is a verb of the Kal conjugation. And by knowing the tradition
of “no mention” we can learn how the Name is not said. How? Simply by
looking at the vowels the scribes put within it. In Exodus 3:14 and wherever
else יהוה stands by itself in the Hebrew text it appears as Y’hvah יְהוָה or Y’hovah יְהֹוָה
, depending on the edition of the Tanakh. We get
“Jehovah” from this. Whenever יהוה
is found with Adonai אֲדֹנָי (Lord) as in
אֲדֹנָי יהוה it appears as Y’hvih יְהוִה
or Yehovih יְהֹוִה . Why?
Well, it has to do with the nature of the Hebrew language, how it fell into
disuse, and, of course, Rabbinic tradition.
14. Hebrew is, and always
has been, a language of consonants. A few of those consonants, were sometimes
also used to represent vowel sounds. They are four: Aleph א , Hei ה , Vav ו , and Yud י . Not surprisingly,
they are known as “vowel-letters.”16 The
and Hei ה can represent an “ah”
sound like the “a” in “father.” The Vav ו can be an “oh” like the “o” in “no” or an “oo”
like the “u” in “flute.” The Yud
represent "ee” like the “i” in “machine” or “ay” like the “ei”
15. Different words are often written with exactly the
same consonants. For instance, in print, the letters דבר can be understood
as, "he spoke," "it was spoken," "word," "word of," "plague," or "pasture."17 The pronunciation and meaning depend on the context
and the place of the word in the sentence. This poses little difficulty to
native speakers of the language. Context and syntax are usually enough to
decide which word a certain combination of letters represents, even when the
word contains no vowel-letters. Even if multiple pronunciations are possible
for any particular combination, it's not too difficult to know how it should
be pronounced. Many more examples could be cited, but it would not benefit
us here. Just thumb through the Analytical Lexicon sometime and you'll see
how many combinations are possible for certain words.
16. Many assert that Aramaic replaced Hebrew as the common
dialect of Jewish life sometime during the Babylonian captivity. John Parkhurst,
in his Lexicon of New Testament Greek, gives seven reasons why this is not
so. I will quote him briefly.
Prejudice apart, Is it probable that any people should lose their native language
in a captivity of no longer than seventy years?...
It appears from Scripture, that under the captivity the Jews actually retained not only their language,
but their manner of writing it, or the form and fashion of their letters.
Else, what meaneth Esth. viii. 9, where we read that the decree of Ahasuerus, or Artaxerxes Longimanus, was written
unto every province according to the writing thereof, and unto every people
after their language, and to the Jews according
to their writing, and according to their language?...
who prophesied during the captivity to the Jews in Chaldea, wrote and published
his prophecies in Hebrew...
The prophets who flourished soon after the return of the Jews to their own
country, namely Haggai and Zechariah, prophesied to them in Hebrew, and so did Malachi, who seems
to have delivered his prophecy about an hundred years after that event...
who was governor of the Jews about a hundred
years after their return from Babylon, not
only wrote his book in Hebrew, but in ch. xiii, 23, 24, complains that some of the
Jews, during his absence, had married wives of Ashdod, of Ammon, and of Moab, and that their
children could not speak יהודית
the Jews’ language, but spake a mixed tongue... But how impertinent is
the remark, and how foolish the complaint of Nehemiah, that the children of some Jews, who had
taken foreigners for wives, could not speak pure Hebrew, if that tongue had ceased
to be vernacular among the people in general a hundred years before that period?...
It is highly absurd and unreasonable to suppose that the writers of the New
Testament used the term Hebrew to signify a different language from that which the
Grecizing Jews denoted by that name; but the language which those Jews
called Hebrew after the Babylonish captivity, was not Syriac, or Chaldee, but the same
in which the law and the prophets were written...
It may be worth adding, that Josephus, who frequently uses the expressions
thn ‘EBRAIWN dialekton [the Hebrew dialect], glwttan thn ‘EBRAIWN [the Hebrew
‘EBRAISTI [in Hebrew]18, for the language in which Moses wrote... tells us... that towards the conclusion of the siege
of Jerusalem he addressed not only John, the commander of the Zealots, but
toij polloij the (Jewish) multitude who were with him, ‘¸EBRAIZWN in the Hebrew tongue, which was therefore the common language of the Jews
at that time, i.e. about forty years after our Savior’s death.
whole, I conclude that the Jews did not exchange the Hebrew for the Chaldee language at
17. The text of the Mishnah,20 compiled at
the beginning of the third century C.E. by Judah the Prince, corroborates
this point of view. Written almost entirely in Hebrew,21 it reflects not only the “Oral Tradition” of second
temple times, but the language in which that tradition was communicated. In
the words of the Mishnah, “A man is obligated to speak in his Rabbi’s
tongue” (Eduyot 1:3). M. H. Segal, in discussing the Hebrew of the Mishnah,
has this to say on the subject:
we must refer briefly to the linguistic trustworthiness of the Mishnaic tradition...
Its trustworthiness is established by the old rule, older than the age of
Hillel, that a tradition - which of course, was handed down by word of mouth
- must be repeated in the exact words of the master from whom it had been
learnt: חַיָּב אָדָם לוֹמַר
בִּלְשׁוֹן רַבּוֹ [A man
is obligated to speak in his Rabbi’s tongue]22. This rule was strictly observed throughout the Mishnaic
and Talmudic periods (cf. ‘Ed. i.3, with the commentaries; Ber. 47a; Bek.
5a), and was in fact, the basis of the authority of the Oral Law. So careful
were the Rabbis in the observance of this rule that they often reproduced
even the mannerisms and the personal peculiarities of the Masters from whom
they had received a particular tradition, or halaka. This rule makes it certain
that, at least in most cases, the sayings of the Rabbis have been handed down
in the language in which they had originally been expressed.23
18. The decline of Hebrew as a spoken language is thought
to have begun with the fall of the Hasmonean dynasty and the rise of Herod
to power in 63 B.C.E. A number of circumstances contributed to its final demise.
Mr. Segal sums it up well.
destruction of many of the native families in the bloody wars which accompanied
the coming of the Romans and the establishment of the Herodians (whose original
language was probably Aram.); the closer connexion between Jerusalem and the
Aram. Jewries of Syria and the Eastern Diaspora which followed on the incorporation
of Palestine in the Roman Empire; and the settlement of those Aram.-speaking
Jews in Jerusalem, all tended to spread the use of Aram. at the expense of
MH. But MH still remained a popular speech, as is testified by numerous passages
in its literature... Finally, the destruction of Jewish life in Judea after
the defeat of Bar Kokba (135 C.E.), and the establishment of the new Jewish
centre in the Aram.-speaking Galilee, seem to have led to the disappearance
of MH as a popular tongue.24
19. It appears that Hebrew remained a spoken tongue well
into the fourth century.25 As
such, its mode of written communication (letters and vowel-letters) was more
than adequate to facilitate understanding. As it fell into disuse by the masses,
however, it became more and more difficult to decipher written texts. This
problem became most acute in relation to the Tanakh. As use of the language
diminished, the proper reading of the sacred scrolls increasingly came into
question. How could the accepted reading of the text be maintained and perpetuated
as the language slowly died? This was the challenge. Sometime in the sixth
or seventh century C.E. a group of scribes rose to the occasion. They invented
a set of vowel signs or "points" to accompany the consonants and preserve
the "traditional" reading of the Hebrew Scriptures.26 They were placed within, above and below the letters of
יְהוָה and Y’hovah יְהֹוָה
20. Since Pharisaic “reform” dictated an outright ban
on speaking the Name “according to the letters,” whenever the scribes
encountered “ יהוה ” they inserted into it, with a slight modification, the
vowels of the word Adonai אֲדֹנָי
(Lord). This was to signify to those who would
read the text that Adonai אֲדֹנָי
was to be read instead. Depending on the edition of the Tanakh, this
looks like Y’hvah יְהוָה or Y’hovah יְהֹוָה
. Now, the discerning student is going to notice
right away that neither set of these vowels matches exactly the vowels under
. Bear with me
for just a few lines. I’ll try to make the reason as simple as possible.
21. The first difference is in the vowels under the initial
letter. Under the Yud י of Y’hvah יְהוָה and Y’hovah יְהֹוָה
is a Sh’va ( ְ ). Under the Aleph א of Adonai אֲדֹנָי is a Hataph Patach
( ֲ ). The difference in vowels is due to the difference
in the nature of the two letters. The Yud י , being a standard consonant, can take a Sh’va at the beginning
of a word. The Aleph א , being in essence a mild guttural, cannot. It must take
a compound Sh’va, (in this case a Hataph Patach) at the beginning of a word. The scribes simply transferred
the nature of the short vowel under the Aleph א to the vowel under the Yud י rather than the
22. The second vowel in Adonai אֲדֹנָי is a Holam ( ֹ ). In the case
of Y’hvah יְהוָה it is missing.
This is, I believe, to make doubly sure Adonai אֲדֹנָי
would be read, as Y’hvah יְהוָה is quite
redundant and impossible to pronounce.
and Y’hovih יְהֹוִה
23. Often times the words Adonai אֲדֹנָי and יהוה appear side
by side in the Hebrew text. When the scribes encountered this combination
they inserted the vowels for the word Elohim אֱלֹהִים
(Elohim) into the Tetragram so that Adonai Elohim would
be read instead of Adonai being read twice. Depending on the edition of the Tanakh, this
looks like Adonai Y’hvih יְהוִה
or Adonai Y’hovih
אֲדֹנָי יְהֹוִה . Again, there is a
discrepancy between the vowels under the Yud י of יהוה
and the Aleph א of Adonai
אֲדֹנָי for the same reasons as stated above. The pronunciation Y’hvih יְהוִה is every
bit as impossible as Y’hvah יְהוָה .
24. It is worth noting that the edition of the Tanakh which
uses Y’hvah יְהוָה also uses Y’hvih יְהוִה
. The other edition uses Y’hovah יְהֹוָה and Y’hovih יְהֹוִה
25. All this has been said to help us see that the vowels
under יהוה are not its real vowels. The following entry is from the popular four volume
Even-Shoshan dictionary used in Israel. It verifies what has just been asserted.
יֱהֹוִה... נִבְטָא "אֲדֹנָי"
אוֹ "הַשֵּׁם" אוֹ "אֲדשֶׁם" - אִם נִקּוּדוֹ
"יְהֹוָה"; אוֹ "אֱלֹהִים, אֱלֹקִים" - אִם נִקּוּדוֹ
"יֱהֹוִה", מִשּׁוּם הָאִסּוּר לַהֲגוֹת אֶת
יֱהֹוִה ... pronounced “Adonai”
or “HaShem” or “Adoshem” - when its vowels are “ יְהֹוָה ”;
or “Elohim, Elokim” - when its vowels are “ יֱהֹוִה ”, because of
the prohibition of uttering the Name according to its letters.28
26. By the looks of the vowel points under the Tetragram
in this entry, it appears that there must be at least a third edition of the
Tanakh. The vowel under the initial Yud י , when the Tetragram is to be read as Elohim, is the short
Hataph Segol ( ֱ ) which regularly stands under the Aleph א of Elohim אֱלֹהִים . This combination
in יהוה is ridiculous, as a Hataph Segol
is never found under a Yud י in a legitimate word.
It is under the Yud י in יהוה only to remind the reader to read, “Elohim,” and not, “Adonai.”
27. It becomes evident that the vowels assigned to יהוה in the Scriptures
are not the vowels which would allow one to speak it “according to its letters.”
Y’hovah יְהֹוָה and Y’hovih יְהֹוִה are
not, therefore, legitimate pronunciations. They are, in essence, linguistic
bastards. They represent the vowels of the nouns Adonai אֲדֹנָי and Elohim אֱלֹהִים ,
respectively, imposed upon the letters of a verb. Gesenius sums up the matter
is thus evident that the word יהוה
does not stand with its own vowels, but with those
of another word, the inquiry arises, what then are its true and genuine vowels?29
יְהֽוֹ , Yáhu יָֽהוּ and Y’hu יְהוּ
28. Since the Name cannot
be learned by looking within the Tetragram itself, we have to look elsewhere.
The first step in ascertaining its true pronunciation is, I believe, observing
how it is pronounced when it is part of men's proper names. It appears three
•Y’hó יְהֽוֹ is how
the Name appears at the beginning and in the middle of a man's name. It has
two syllables. The first letter, Yud י , is pronounced as the “y” in “yes.” The Sh’va (
ְ ) under the
initial Yud י ( יְ ) indicates “the absence of a vowel.”30 It is such a slight sound that one hears little more
than the consonant with which it is associated. The first syllable is Y’- יְ- . The next letter,
Hei ה , is the first letter
of the second syllable. Pronounced as the “h” in “hoe,” it is often
treated as though it were a silent letter and disappears from both speech
and the printed page. The horizontal line ( ֽ ) under the Hei ה ( הֽ ) is the accent
mark. The accent is on the second syllable due to the nature of the Sh’va under the first.
The letter which follows the Hei ה is Vav ו , the third letter of the Tetragram. It is not a consonant
here, but a vowel, as there is a Holam ( ֹ ) above it. The Vav/Holam
combination ( וֹ ) is pronounced “oh”
like the “o” in “no.” The second syllable is -hó -הֽוֹ . The Sh’va under the Yud י , followed by the
often silent Hei ה , helps us understand why Y’hó יְהֽוֹ
is often found in a man’s name shortened to
Yó יֽוֹ .
•Yáhu יָֽהוּ is how the Name appears at the end of a man's name.
The accent was assigned to the first syllable. The Kamatz ( ָ ) under the initial
Yud י ( יָ ) is pronounced
“ah” like the “a” in “father.” The first syllable is Yá יָֽ- . Instead of
the Vav/Holam combination ( וֹ
) after the Hei ה of the second syllable there is a Shuruk ( וּ ) which is pronounced
“oo” like the “u” in “flute.” The second syllable is -hu -הוּ . Yáhu is often found
shortened to Yáh יָֽה .
•Y’hu יְהוּ is how the Name sometimes appears at the end of one
particular name. The characteristics and pronunciation of the Yud י and the Sh’va of the first
syllable is the same as in Y’hó יְהֽוֹ
. The pronunciation of the Hei ה and the Shuruk (
וּ ) of the
second syllable is the same as in Yáhu יָֽהוּ
. Although the second syllable should take the
accent due to the nature of the Sh’va under the initial Yud י , the scribes saw fit to exclude it.
29. When found at the beginning of someone's name, the
Name is pronounced Y’hó יְהֽוֹ
as in Y’hónatan יְהֽוֹנָתָן
1 Samuel 14:6 & 8. Jonathan means, “
Given.” When it appears in the middle of a man's name the pronunciation
is the same - Y’hó יְהֽוֹ
as in El’Y’hóeinai אֶלְיְהֽוֹעֵינַי (Elioenai). Elioenai means, “My Eyes Are Toward יהוה .” We find
this name in 1 Chronicles 26:3. As already mentioned, and as is common in
modern Hebrew, the Hei ה in Biblical Hebrew often
vanishes. So it is that we find Y’hó יְהֽוֹ
to Yó יֽוֹ , Thus Y’hónatan יְהֽוֹנָתָן
becomes Yónatan יֽוֹנָתָן in 1 Samuel
13:2, 3 & 22 while El’Y’hóeinai אֶלְיְהֽוֹעֵינַי
becomes El’Yóeinai אֶלְיֽוֹעֵינַי
in 1 Chronicles 4:36.
30. When the Name appears at the end of a proper name it
is pointed Yáhu יָֽהוּ as in MíkhaYáhu מִֽיכָיָֽהוּ (Michaiah)
in 2 Chronicles 17:7, and EliYáhu אֵלִיָּֽהוּ (Elijah)
in I Kings 17. “Michaiah” means, “Who Is Like יהוה ?” while Elijah means, “ יהוה Is My Elohim.” This
pronunciation also gets shortened. Thus EliYáhu אֵלִיָּֽהוּ appears
in Malachi 3:23 as EliYáh אֵלִיָּֽה and MíkhaYáhu מִֽיכָיָֽהוּ becomes
in Nehemiah 12:35.
31. There are several examples of an exception to how the
Name looks at the end of proper names, but only in one name. In Judges 17
verses 1 & 4, I Kings 22:8 ff, 2 Chronicles 18:7 and Jeremiah 36:11 &
13, where we would expect to find Michaiah as MíkhaYáhu מִֽיכָיָֽהוּ
, we find instead MikháY’hu מִיכָֽיְהוּ
. To my knowledge, this is the only name in which
the Name is ever pointed like this.
11:3 and Sham Y’hú שָׁם יְהֽוּ
32. We see three evidently related, but distinct pronunciations
of the Name in the Hebrew Scriptures. How do we explain this phenomenon? Perhaps
we should ask another question first: Do any of these pronunciations reflect
a legitimate verbal form? With this question, we reach a critical point in
our study. No longer can we simply observe the Biblical data. Now we must
evaluate it. The key to a proper analysis and the answer to our question is
found hidden away in the little read book of Kohelet (Ecclesiastes). There,
in the eleventh chapter, is a verse which apparently has been overlooked in
all the discussions about the Name. I came across it accidentally while reading
the Hebrew text one day many years ago. One phrase all but shouted at me from
the printed page.
יא:ג אִם־יִמָּֽלְאוּ הֶֽעָבִים
גֶּשֶׁם עַל־הָאָרֶץ יָרִיקוּ וְאִם־יִפּוֹל
עֵץ בַּדָּרוֹם וְאִם בַּצָּפוֹן מְקוֹם שֶׁיִּפּוֹל
הָעֵץ שָׁם יְהֽוּא:
11:3 If the clouds fill up with rain, they
empty upon the earth; and whether the tree falls to the south or to the north,
in the place where the tree falls, there
it shall be.
33. "There it shall be," translates sham y’hú שָׁם יְהֽוּא . Sham שָׁם means “there.” The Analytical Hebrew Lexicon, which
breaks up each word in the Hebrew text into its component parts, gives us
some very interesting information about the word y’hú יְהֽוּא . It is
a third person singular, masculine, Kal future (he will...) form of the verb
Hei Vav Hei ה.ו.ה. (to be)! ("Tree" is
a masculine word in Hebrew.) A note in brackets also informs us that y’hú יְהֽוּא is
apocopated (abbreviated as “ap.” or “apoc.”). “Apocopated” simply
describes “the loss of one or more sounds or letters at the end of a word...”31 Here is the entry:
Kal fut. 3 per. sing. masc. [for יְהוּ ap. for
יֶהֱוֶה § 24. rem. 3] . . . . . . . הוה 32
34. According to the Analytical Lexicon the word y’hú יְהֽוּא
is a shortened verbal form of Yeheveh יֶהֱוֶה . It
reflects the meaning of the Name exactly and is identical in pronunciation
with how it is pronounced at the end of Michaiah's name sometimes. The note
in brackets also directs us to section 24 remark 3 at the front of the lexicon
where we read that y’hú יְהֽוּא is
a shortened “Syriac” form of Yih’veh יִהְוֶה
verbs הָיָה to be and חָיָה to live, which would properly have in the fut. apoc. יִהְי , and יִחְי , change
these forms into יְהִי and יְחִי
... A perfectly Syriac form is יְהוּא Ec. 11.3,
for יִהְוֶה , ap. יְהוּ (from הָוָה
35. In the first quote from the Analytical Lexicon we are
told that y’hú יְהֽוּא is a shortened
form of Yeheveh יֶהֱוֶה , while in the second we read that it is a shortened
form of Yih’veh יִהְוֶה . The discrepancy arises from the fact that neither
of the longer forms is found in any Hebrew literature. The longer forms are
hypothetical reconstructions based on what we know of Hebrew verb patterns.
Since it is the shortened form which mirrors the pronunciation of the Name
in Michaiah’s name, it is the shortened forms of y’hi יְהִי and y’hu יְהוּ
which next require our attention.
and Y’hu יְהוּ
36. So, we have in the words y’hí יְהִי
(root Hei Yud
Hei ה.י.ה. ) and y’hú יְהֽוּ
(root Hei Vav
Hei ה.ו.ה. ) shortened forms of the imperfect. Normally this shortened form
represents a nuance of meaning called the “jussive,”34 which expresses a “command or wish”35 and is recognized in Lamed-Hei ל"ה verbs36 by
the loss of the -ֶה ending of the usual imperfect.37 The third person masculine imperfect of Hei Yud Hei ה.י.ה.
is yih’yéh יִהְיֶה
. The shortened form is y’hí יְהִי
. Although we have no concrete witness as to the
long form of the third person masculine imperfect of Hei Vav Hei ה.ו.ה.
, we have the shortened form - y’hú יְהֽוּ . Working
backwards from there, based on the vowel pattern of yih’yéh יִהְיֶה , the grammarians
surmise that the regular imperfect is yih’véh
(yih’wéh)38 יִהְוֶה or
(yehewéh) יֶהֱוֶה as seen in the last two quotes above.
37. It seems odd, though, does it not, that the form of
the Name as it appears within so many personal names reflects not the usual
form of the imperfect, but the shortened form, the form that usually stands
for the jussive? So, what about Ecc. 11:3? Are we to understand it as, “Where
the tree falls, there let it be?” Is it a jussive? Actually, no, it is not. Gesenius,
in his Hebrew Grammer, says the jussive is often used for the regular imperfect.
He cites twenty specific instances where y’hí
יְהִי is used in place of the full form yih’yéh יִהְיֶה
in not a few cases, the jussive is used, without any collateral sense, for
the ordinary imperfect form, and this occurs not alone in forms which may
arise from a misunderstanding of the defective writing... but also in shortened
forms, such as יְהִי Gen 4917 (Sam. יִהְיֶה
), Dt 288, 1S 105, 2S 524, Ho 61, 114, Am 514, Mi 12, Zp 213, Zc 95, R 7216f. (after
other jussives), 10431, Jb 1812, 2023.26.28, 278, 3321, 3437, Ru 34.”39
38. It is evident that in the passages cited above by Gesenius,
where y’hi יְהִי is used for the ordinary imperfect, the final Hei ה of the full imperfect
form disappears. This is common for Lamed-Hei
ל"ה jussives. It is also evident that in Ecclesiastes 11:3
where y’hú יְהֽוּא is used for the ordinary imperfect, it does not lose
its final letter, but exchanges it for an Aleph א . This is most uncommon for
Lamed-Hei ל"ה jussives. Should we understand this phenomenon as a “perfectly
Syriac form” as Benjamin Davidson says? Or should we go with the opinion
of Gesenius that the true reading of Ecc. 11:3 is found in the few manuscripts
which read sham hu שָׁם הוּא
(there he is) instead of sham y’hú שָׁם יְהֽוּא (there he will be)?40 Or
is there yet another way of looking at it? Could it be that this shortened
form of the imperfect, which does not lose its final letter, is used for the
usual imperfect because the usual imperfect was never used for this particular
verb? Perhaps we should abandon our search for the “ordinary imperfect”
of Hei Vav Hei ה.ו.ה. and view y’hú יְהֽוּא as
the legitimate heir to the throne. Perhaps in this particular Lamed-Hei ל"ה
verb the jussive
and imperfect are not merely interchangeable as they appear to be in other
Lamed-Hei ל"ה verbs,41 but indistinguishable.
39. Stop and think for just a moment. The Name is a third
person singular, masculine, Kal future verbal form from the three letter root
Hei Vav Hei ה.ו.ה. (to be). At the end
of Michaiah’s name it is sometimes represented as Y’hu יְהוּ . It drops the final
Hei ה as it does within
every man’s name. It is a shortened form. Y’hú( א ) יְהֽוּא in Ecc.
11:3 is also a third person singular, masculine, Kal future verbal form, from
the root Hei Vav Hei ה.ו.ה. . It, too, is
a shortened form, but does not drop its final letter. Rather, it is changed
from a Hei ה to an Aleph א . What do we get when we change the “Syriac” style Aleph א back to its original
Hei ה ? We get Y’hú( ה
) יְהֽוּה . Is
there any difference in speech between y’hú(
א ) יְהֽוּא
with an Aleph א and Y’hú(
ה ) יְהֽוּה
with a Hei ה ? No. Neither the Hei ה nor the Aleph א affect the pronunciation.
They are both, for all intents and purposes, silent. And what do we get when
we return the lacking Hei ה to the Name as it sometimes appears at the end of Michaiah’s
name? We get Y’hu( ה ) יְהוּה
. And when we supply the accent it would have in
normal speech we have Y’hú(
ה ) יְהֽוּה
. Is there any difference in meaning between Y’hú( ה
) יְהֽוּה with
a Hei ה and y’hú( א
) יְהֽוּא with
א ? Grammatically,
no. Both express, “He will be.” But contextually there is a tremendous
difference, for y’hú( א ) יְהֽוּא
means generically, “he will be,” while Y’hú( ה
) יְהֽוּה is
the Name and quite specifically communicates, “He Will Be.” Perhaps that
is precisely the reason why Y’hú יְהֽוּ
in Ecc. 11:3 was written with an Aleph א and not a Hei ה . A change of the
final letter from a Hei ה to an Aleph א would be all that was necessary to distinguish the
ordinary, everyday, purely grammatical, "he will be," from the One whose name
means, "He Will Be," would it not?
40. By far, the most common pronunciation of the Name is
Yahweh יַהְוֶה . One
popular line of reasoning in support of this pronunciation has to do with
a statement made by Josephus. According to him, the Tetragram consisted of
“four vowels.” Speaking of the high priest’s garments, he says the following:
also of fine linen encompassed his head, which was tied by a blue ribbon,
about which there was another golden crown, in which was engraven the sacred
name: it consists of four vowels.42
41. After reading this some have mistakenly concluded that
since Josephus calls the letters of the Tetragram, “Four vowels,” they
were pronounced as such: The Yud י is pronounced “ee,” the first Hei ה is pronounced “ah,”
ו is pronounced
“oo,” and the final Hei ה is pronounced, “ay.” Put them all together and
you have, “ee-ah-oo-ay,” hence - Yahweh.43 The Scriptural evidence presented here, however, does not
lead us to this pronunciation. Nor does the structure and character of the
Hebrew language itself. In order to properly understand what Josephus meant
by, “Four vowels,” we must know something about that language, as he originally
wrote The Jewish War in Hebrew. He then translated it into Greek. Here it is
in his own words:
proposed to myself, for the sake of such as live under the government of the
Romans, to translate those books into the Greek tongue, which I formerly composed
in the language of our country...44
42. It has already been shown that the common language
of Israel during the time of Josephus was Hebrew. The comment about the “Four
vowels,” then, was originally expressed in Hebrew. The only thing left of The Jewish War in that tongue is said
to be a “pseudepigraphic medieval Hebrew paraphrase...”45 It would not surprise me one bit to find the Hebrew
of that document to be written in a distinctive, Mishnaic Hebrew style. Perhaps
closer scrutiny would reveal it to be a bona-fide copy of the original and
not from medieval times at all. For now, though, we must be content with the
concept that the words, “Four vowels,” is an English translation of a
Greek translation of a Hebrew original which we do not have. The translation
is at best, second hand. It leaves us English-speakers with problems on several
43. First, though it is true, as was pointed out earlier,
that Hei ה , Vav ו , and Yud י are known as “vowel-letters,”
it is not true they are always vowels. It would be accurate to say that in
a language of consonants, such as Hebrew, they can double as vowels. And when
they do, they are always preceded by a consonant. The consonants are said
to be “vowel carriers.” Vowels do not stand by themselves. It is, therefore,
quite impossible for the Yud י of יהוה to be a vowel.
It must be a consonant. The “Four vowels,” for this reason, cannot be
44. Secondly, there is no such thing as a Hebrew verb comprised
solely of vowels. It is the prescribed modification of consonants and vowels
which colors the verbal root with the various shades of meaning necessary
for successful communication. For this reason also, the “Four vowels”
cannot be four vowels.
45. Thirdly, it is precisely this modification of the Hebrew
verb which not only leads us away from the concept of the “Four vowels”
being pronounced as four vowels, but mitigates against the use of Yahweh as a valid verbal
form of any kind. The Hebrew verb is conjugated or "built" in seven different
ways. Each conjugation carries a slightly different nuance of meaning. In
simplified form they are as follows:
(Kal) - Simple
- Simple Passive
- Intensive Passive
- Causative Passive
- Intensive Reflexive
46. Each conjugation has its own peculiar vowel patterns
for the perfect (past), imperfect (future), and present tenses. Each conjugation,
with its corresponding vowel patterns, modifies the simple, root meaning of
the verb, conveying a slightly different nuance of meaning.46 Not all verbs use all seven conjugations.
47. The vowel pattern of the word Yahweh יַהְוֶה identifies
it as a verb of the Hiph’il,47 the
so-called “causative” conjugation, from the root Hei Vav Hei ה.ו.ה. (to be) which
would literally mean, "He Will Cause To Be." That's a problem, though, because
the root Hei Vav Hei ה.ו.ה. , like its counterpart
Hei Yud Hei ה.י.ה. , has never developed
forms in the Hiph’il conjugation. In other words, Yahweh יַהְוֶה
, is a verb which does not exist in the Hebrew
language. It is wholly unintelligible.48 Even
if, for sake of argument, Yahweh יַהְוֶה
did represent a legitimate verbal form, the accent
would be on the last syllable (Yahwéh יַהְוֶֽה
) and his Name would mean, "He Causes To Be." However,
the "I AM THAT I AM" of Exodus 3 was communicated in the Kal conjugation,
not the Hiph’il. Therefore, the meaning of his Name is not to be associated
with the Hiph’il conjugation.
48. As a Hebrew speaker, Josephus knew all these things.
Unless he was guilty of promulgating disinformation, what he most likely meant
to convey by, “Four vowels,” and what his contemporaries most likely understood
when they heard it, was, “Four vowel-letters.” I believe the Hebrew original
of The Jewish War would bear this out. From our vantage point, however, there is
nothing in the words of Josephus which would lead us to understand that the
“Four vowels” were pronounced as such, let alone as “Yahweh.” The
structure and nature of the Hebrew language defy it.
יָֽהוּ "ה" ?
49. On the basis of its purely imaginary nature, Yahweh should be disqualified
from consideration as the actual pronunciation of the Name. As a Hiph’il
verbal form or a word made up of all vowels it is a phantom. Its legitimacy
ought to be seriously called into question. We know nothing, really, of its
origin. The case for this particular pronunciation rests somewhat precariously
on Greek and Latin manuscript evidence. The variants are many. The pronunciation
of יהוה is reportedly represented in Greek and Latin49 as:
Yáhu, or Y’hu)
Iawoueh, Iawouhi, Iawouea (Yahweh?)
50. In reading some of these transliterations, it does
seem like the sound “Yahweh” is what the transliterators were after, doesn’t
it? This puzzled me for some time as “Yahweh” is nonsense in Hebrew. Then,
one day, I came across this pseudo-scholarly statement about the Name:
represents YAHU-, and the final ה
represents -EH or -WEH.50
51. Something in the way
that was written just didn’t sound right. And then it hit me: It’s not
the Hebrew which represents the transliteration, but the transliteration which
represents the Hebrew! What if we turned the sentence around to reflect reality?
“-EH represents the final ה
and YAHU- represents the יהו .” That rang a
bell. If Yahweh really is an ancient pronunciation, is it possible that it is
in essence a blended form of Yáhu-Hei יָֽהוּ "ה"
- the form Yáhu יָֽהוּ and the name of the final letter Hei ה spoken at the end?51 Could there have been more than one or two original
“pseudonyms” used during second temple times? In addition to Adonai אֲדֹנָי and
, could there have been, or was there also Yáhu-Hei יָֽהוּ
"ה" ? This might account for the occurrences
of a few Greek transliterations which seem to communicate a Yahweh-like sound to
our ears. That is, of course, speculation on my part, but apart from speculation
I have no explanation as to its origin.
52. Those of us who believe that the written Word is the
standard by which all things are measured need to act like it. The practice
of addressing the Almighty exclusively by the title, “LORD,” is a Rabbinical
dictum which is not in harmony with the Word. Sure, he is the Master, but
that is not his Name, the Name by which he wants to be mentioned. We should be using
his Name. In fact, if we were following Biblical protocol, we would be using
his Name ninety-eight percent more often than the pseudonyms, “Adonai,”
or, “LORD.” That’s right - ninety-eight percent! In the Hebrew text
יהוה is found alone over 6,600 times and joined with Adonai אֲדֹנָי (Lord)
another 285 times.52 Compare that with
the 140 times Adonai אֲדֹנָי
(Lord) is used by itself,53 and we can see how far we’ve sailed off course. Isn’t
it about time we threw the worthless compass overboard and started using the
one that points north?
53. We began our study by looking for a form of the verb
Hei Vav Hei ה.ו.ה. which would communicate, “He will be.” This is what
his Name means. We found such a form in Ecclesiastes 11:3. We found, moreover,
that the vowel points of this verb match precisely the form of the Name as
it appears in numerous instances at the end of the name, “Michaiah.”
54. Since y’hú יְהֽוּא
at Ecc. 11:3 is an authentic verbal form, is it
not simple deduction to consider the form Y’hu יְהוּ at the end of the
name, “Michaiah,” as the genuine article as well? Should these two not
be taken as corroborating witnesses? When we can take y’hú יְהֽוּא at
Ecc. 11:3, exchange the substitute Aleph א for the original Hei ה , and come up with the same thing as when we take Y’hu יְהוּ within
the name MikháY’hu מִיכָֽיְהוּ
(Michaiah), and restore the proper accent and
dropped Hei ה , do we not have everything we need to identify יְהֽוּה as
the authentic form of the Name? Let me diagram it.
55. This leads us to understand the pointing Y’hó יְהֽוֹ and Yáhu יָֽהוּ within
other men’s names as modifications. In both cases the unaccented syllables
are the authentic ones. Both unaccented syllables are found together in the
unaccented Y’hu יְהוּ at the end of MikháY’hu מִיכָֽיְהוּ
(Michaiah). The Name, therefore, is not a “full
form imperfect” like Yih’veh (Yih’weh) יִהְוֶה
or Yeheveh (Yeheweh) יֶהֱוֶה
. If it were,
what need would the scribes have had to change the pronunciation of the “shortened”
imperfect Y’hú יְהֽוּ to Y’hó יְהֽוֹ and Yáhu יָֽהוּ
in the majority of proper names? If his Name was
Yih’veh (Yih’weh) יִהְוֶה
or Yeheveh (Yeheweh) יֶהֱוֶה
the shortened form Y’hú יְהֽוּ
would have been all the change necessary to keep
it from being spoken in keeping with Rabbinical tradition. And yet it is readily
apparent that the “shortened” form has been altered. That speaks volumes
in and of itself.
56. But it does not tell us why the name “Michaiah”
is not pointed consistently. Why the ambivalence? Why is it written now as
, and now as MikháY’hu מִיכָֽיְהוּ
? Could it be that the scribes who pointed the
text, in those places where it reflects the actual verbal form, wanted to
be sure that his Name indeed endured “forever,” to “all generations,”
at least in a few places? Could it be that the name Michaiah was chosen to
carry this honored distinction because his name means, “Who Is Like יְהֽוּה ?”
Regardless of exactly why, when all the witnesses have been questioned, there
it is, the Name above all names. It is available to seekers of every generation,
embedded in the name MikháY’hu מִיכָֽיְהוּ
and in the text of Ecc. 11:3.
57. I would like to know why this phenomenon has not been
entered into the equation. Why has this information not made it into any discussions
about his Name? Is it not applicable? Is it not pertinent? If not, why?
58. I have one further observation to make. In each instance
where the Name is represented as Y’hó יְהֽוֹ
, it is at the beginning of the man’s name. The authentic,
unaccented Y’- יְ- is the first syllable. In each instance where the Name is represented
יָֽהוּ , it is at the end of the man's name. The authentic, unaccented
-hu -הוּ is the last
syllable. Perhaps it contains a riddle?
is the beginning and the end, the first and the last.
- The Hebrew Alephbet
- The Hebrew Vowel System
- The Seven Hebrew Conjugations54
Even-Shoshan: Concordantziah Chadashah (Kiryat Seifer, 1983), pp. 440-448.
קוֹנקוֹרְדַנְצְיָה חֲדָשָׁה (קִרְיַת סֵפֶר, 3891), ד' 044-844.
In most English
Bibles “LORD” and “GOD” (all capital letters) are regularly employed
to represent the Tetragram where it appears in the Herbrew text.
The Hebrew reads:
אַף הַהוֹגֶה אֶת הַשֵּׁם
The Hebrew reads:
בַּמִּקְדָּשׁ אוֹמֵר אֶת
הַשֵּׁם כִּכְתָבוֹ: . See also Tamid 7:2.
Yoma 3:8, 4:2,
6:2; Sanhedrin 7:5, 8.
6 William Gesenius: Hebrew
and Chaldee Lexicon (Erdmans,1974), pp. 244-245.
7 The Hebrew is: מִצְוַת
8 The Hebrew quotation from Isaiah is word for word,
including מִצְוַת אֲנָשִׁים
מְלֻמָּדָֽה - “the erudite
commandment of men.”
9 Two of the eight currently available, complete Shem
Tov Hebrew Matthew manuscripts read, “Keep doing everything he tells you,” meaning
Moses. The other six read, “Keep doing everything they tell you,” referring to
the Pharisees. The latter is in line with the Greek text from which come our
English translations. In my mind, whether Yeshua said, “He,” or “They,”
does not alter the meaning within the immediate context. The reference to
Mosaic authority is an appeal to submit to Moses. If we are to listen to the
Pharisees, it is only so far as their teaching accurately reflects Moses.
If not the actual words, the “he” reading of the two Shem Tov documents
is at least a clarification. Either way, we are to obey Moses and not pattern
our lives after the Pharisees. This conclusion should be inescapable in any
is not within the scope of this article to either endorse or discredit the
Shem Tov Hebrew text of Matthew. I have quoted from it because it sheds much
light on the position the Master took against the oral traditions of his day.
For a crash course in the “reforms” and “precedent” based practices
of Pharisaic/Rabbinic Judaism and an introduction to Shem Tov’s Hebrew text
of Matthew, “the hebrew yeshua vs. the greek
jesus” is a good place to start and is
easy reading. Go to www.hebrewyeshua.com.
10 See also Jeremiah 23:27.
11 The word “Tanakh” is a Hebrew acronym which stands
for “Torah, Prophets and Writings.” Christians generally refer to this
collection of books as the “Old Testament.”
12 See Table 3 at the end of this article.
13 Gesenius: Lexicon, p. 221.
14 Gesenius: Lexicon, p. 337.
15 Gesenius: Lexicon, p. 219.
16 J. Weingreen: A Practical
Grammer For Classical Hebrew (Oxford, 1979),
Davidson: The Analytical Hebrew and Chaldee
Lexicon (Zondervan, 1972), p. 144.
18 Translations in brackets [ ] added for clarity.
19 John Parkhurst: A Greek
And English Lexicon To The New Testament (London,1809),
20 The Mishnah is a compilation of what had been, until
then, the “Oral Law” of Judaism.
21 The Hebrew of the Mishnah is appropriately known as
“Mishnaic” Hebrew or “MH.”
22 Translation in brackets [ ] added for clarity.
23 M. H. Segal: A Grammar
of Mishnaic Hebrew (Oxford, 1983), p. 19.
24 Segal: Grammar, p. 15.
25 Segal: Grammar, p. 15, footnote 2.
26 William Gesenius: Hebrew
Grammar (Oxford, 1983), p. 37.
27 The Hebrew Alephbet and basic vowels, according to
the Sephardic pronunciation used in Israel today, are in Tables 1 and 2 at
the end of this article.
28 Avraham Even-Shoshan: HaMilon HeChadash (Kiryat Seifer,
1985), Vol. 2, p. 483.
הַמִּלּוֹן הֶחָדָשׁ (קִרְיַת סֵפֶר, 5891), כֶּרֶךְ שֵׁנִי,
Gesenius: Lexicon, p. 337.
30 Menahem Mansoor: Biblical
Hebrew Step By Step (Baker Book House, 1992),
31 Merriam-Webster: New
Collegiate Dictionary (G. & C. Merriam
Co., 1997), p. 53.
32 Davidson: Lexicon, p. 300.
33 Davidson: Lexicon, p. 51.
34 Gesenius: Grammar, p. 129.
35 Gesenius: Grammar, p. 131.
36 Lamed-Hei ל"ה verbs have a Hei ה as the third letter of the root.
37 Gesenius: Grammar, p. 210.
38 In modern Israeli Hebrew, the waw ו of Biblical Hebrew
has a “v” sound.
39 Gesenius: Grammar, p. 323.
40 Gesenius: Grammar, p. 211.
41 Gesenius: Grammar, pp. 211-212.
42 Flavius Josephus: The
Jewish War 5:5:7 [5:235]( Translated by William
43 The Sacred Name (Qadesh La Yahweh Press, 2002), pp. 103-104.
44 Josephus: The Jewish
War 1:1 (Translated by William Whiston)
46 See Table 3 at the end of this article for an example.
47 See the paradigm for Lamed-Hei ל"ה verbs in section 24, p. 50 of the Analytical Lexicon.
48 Perhaps this is the real reason some think of the Name
as “heavenly.” If it isn’t a Hebrew word, it doesn’t have to mean
anything in Hebrew, does it?
49 The Sacred Name (Qadesh La Yahweh Press, 2002), pp. 108-111.
50 C. J. Kostner: Come
Out of Her My People (Institute For Scripture
Research, 1998), p. 1.
51 Try saying Yáhu-hei יָֽהוּ "ה"
quickly and repetitively sometime and see what
comes out of your mouth.
52 Even-Shoshan: Concordantziah
, pp. 17-18, 440-448.
אֶבֶן-שׁוֹשָׁן: קוֹנקוֹרְדַנְצְיָה, ד' 71-81, 044-844.
53 Even-Shoshan: Concordantziah
, pp. 17-18.
אֶבֶן-שׁוֹשָׁן: קוֹנקוֹרְדַנְצְיָה, ד' 71-81.
of the word א.כ.ל. - “to eat” was taken from Abraham S. Halkin’s “201
Hebrew Verbs,” page 12.