The untranslatable Hebrew word in Genesis 1:1

[TMMx]

So it works like the Japanese particle "を".

[fecnde]

So it’s not so much untranslatable rather we indicate it’s meaning (which is what translation is) by methods other than seperate words, eg grammar. The meaning is conveyed.

[robinsydney]

Alpha and Omega points to Jesus. See Revelation 1:8. So the fact that the particle is in Genesis 1:1 is saying that Jesus Christ is present in the beginning. Even if it can't be inserted in a translation, it does have a purpose for all times and for all humanity. Hebrew was given to mankind in the beginning by God and is perfect.

[KaiHenningsen]

Hey! Challenge accepted! I know how to read significance into all these 11, 000 occurrences! It's simple: the word tells us what the direct object is.

[Info-Things]

It Easily is Translated⏬️


This apple is very red
This such apple is very red
This apple is green
This here apple is green
This apple is blue
This very apple is blue

Et⏫️

[intraining-eq]

it's more like the dominant case...it is like what comes after has the power above other said things

[Stepi]

That's like trying to find biblical significance in the name Azazel being "AZ-AZ-EL". First-last. The significance of Alpha and Omega is because the Greek philosophers saw significance in some of the letters and numbers.

[ritawing]

Thanks for the Yonathan Adler reference in another video: there's a dude who knows where his towel is!

[QQuandary]

That is fascinating. A word that can't be translated. Languages are so confusing.

[ronjones]

Can't say I've ever come across this et being alpha and omega. It certainly helps if someone is trying to argue that God is created.

[MyMy-tvfd]

rather like many particles in ancient Greek, qv. Denniston

[josephlobb]

Um... the "et" here seems rather important, especially in light of how Jesus interprets it, and how he makes references to the grammatical structure of Hebrew by its letters that composed its words. For example, in his discussion about lust, whether for pleasure or money, he advises us to look at the significance of the eye and the significance of the hand. If you cut off the "ayin" from pleasure and the "kaf" from money, you get left with benevolent attributes to both "oneg" (pleasure) and "kesef" (money). Just because rhe eye isn't in pleasure, and just because the hand isn't in money, doesn't mean they aren't usable for good. However, if we are stingy or takers or lazy or in some other way working iniquity in the realms of pleasure or money, we need to repent. Similarly, the aleph and the tav, which are like the greek alpha and omega, are claimed by Jesus and denote a relationship between the verb and that upon which the verb acts, connecting the verb to its direct object. The relationship between God’s work and God’s work is through Christ- for whom and through whom all things have been made that have been made. So, in Genesis, we see the supremacy of the son as the One for whom and through whom all was created by God. And, meditating on the word of God, I can see that what I do has been done in the sight of God, and He will separate the light from the darkness.

[davidbarber]

Dan, hv you heard the ppl that translate the hebraic text of bereshit 1:1 as " in the beginning HE created God..." ignoring Hebrew/Semitic syntax I believe there was a famous Zohar who 1st at least wrote this erroneous translation

[BradyPostma]

Is the alphabetical order of the Hebrew alphabet preserved from ancient times, then?

[trueliberty]

Dan can you confirm an example of this?
"Bob threw the (et) ball."
Ball being the direct object of the verb threw. Therefore the et would go directly before the word ball is that correct?

[sketchygetchey]

Meanwhile, I’m still here trying to speak English correctly.

[dontgetmad]

Why do you hide comments that you disagree with?
It seams that you can't tolerate people who call you out?

[batbite_]

The new testament is written in a way that actively decentres the original authors of the old testament: That the old testament had meaning beyond the original intention. If one doesn't understand that, the new testament appears as a confusing mess.

[THUNDERSTUD]

How did we figure this out? I'd imagine it was just super confusing till someone was like I don't think this is a damn word.

[chumpchangechamp]

A thing is in fact lost from this, the emphasis that the word indicates the object of a verb, in other words, i am that I am, the name of god means that you are what you do, therefore, the et being the direct reference to the "i am the alpha and omega" is like the same meaning as "i am what i am" because in each case the emphasis is on the doing not the is. The word god is, what we are, because the "I am that I am" is more modernly understood as "I think therefore I am". Both are the realization of self, the very point of the whole explanation that no one seems to understand. What has become lost is the idea that God is what does rather it distorts the concept of God to an object, it makes god the "is" the not the "doing".