Hebrew: A Divine Mystery

A look at how the Hebrew language works and how understanding its structure can deepen and refine our reading of Scripture.

By Joshua Elrom

Read Time: 11 minutes

There are a few things about this article that differ from what you are used to seeing in Christadelphian articles. Brother Josh has a Jewish background and, therefore, approaches the Bible with some of those customs in mind. You’ll note that some names are spelled differently because the Jewish spelling of them more closely aligns with the Hebrew than what we generally recognize. You may notice that he adds a hyphen when writing “G-d.” This is also connected to his background. Though these differences may be a little unfamiliar, I think that you’ll find both great depth and great encouragement in what Brother Josh has written here. In this article, he gives us insight into how Hebrew actually works as a language and how we can better understand it.

Jason Hensley

The Hebrew language is one of the great mysteries of the world and indeed within Christadelphia. Much ink has been spilled over the attempted exegesis and translation of the language of the Old Testament. Hebrew, shrouded in debate and controversy, shines as a jewel among the ancient languages. It’s the very language in which the creation is recorded, what G-d used to describe the splitting of the sea, and employed to breathe forth prophecy, echoing into eternity.

To say Hebrew is an important language would be the understatement of the millennia. Its understanding has shaped our Bible and how we see and understand the Old Testament. Our English Bibles, as we have received them, are the result of innumerable hours consumed scrupulously interpreting and translating the original language into a framework that we can understand. And yet it’s highly evident that after comparing one or two translations of the Bible, you can find some pretty vast differences in translation that affect the meaning of key scriptures.

Let’s take a scripture that is known to many to demonstrate this point. In Isaiah 53:11, the suffering servant takes on the “iniquities” of “many” (KJV). Let’s see the variation among three well-known translations.

Perhaps you can see some extreme variation in the basic grammar of the sentence structure, and indeed, the words themselves don’t necessarily provide a uniform interpretation of the scripture across these three translations. Over the course of this article, I’m going to attempt to explain the reasoning behind such vast differences in translation and what you can do to answer your queries on any word studies that you might have.

Semitic Languages

The Oxford Dictionary has over 500,000 unique English word entries on its website,¹ a staggering number, to say the least, especially considering that the average adult knows only about 20,000 of these.² Let’s compare this information with its Hebrew counterpart. One of the most authoritative dictionaries, the Even-Shoshan Dictionary, has about 70,000 unique Hebrew words, and other dictionaries have estimates upwards of 90,000 – 100,000 words.³ Further, these measurements are for modern Hebrew (spoken in Israel), and thus include tens of thousands of newly invented words to describe modern objects (like cars, planes, and cell phones).

The English of the KJV contains 10,847 unique words in the Old Testament. At a surface glance, the Strong’s Concordance lists about 8,000 unique Hebrew words used in the Old Testament. The 2,000 extra words in English might be explained by the larger lexicon of English words and translators attempting to use more specific words they felt fit the context of any specific verse. But upon closer inspection, we shall see that the difference between the Hebrew and the English is far greater than that.

Semitic languages (Hebrew, Aramaic, Akkadian, Arabic, etc.) all use a root-based system, meaning that there are large word families associated with a (typically) three-letter root. A single three-letter root can have a word family of well over 20 unique word meanings. This tally doesn’t include all the conjugations—past, present, future, singular, plural, etc.,  which would make the count easily over 100 words. The three-letter root is an abstract theoretical construct used to explain the origin of connected words in a given word family. Without getting too technical, there are linguistic patterns that can be treated as a type of framework that are applied to verbs and nouns onto the root to produce nouns, adjectives, and verbs all from a single root. This circumstance means that, from a single root, many more words can be produced by manipulating the root with other letters. The condensed vocabulary can thus be understood as a product of the root-based grammatical system. 13th-century Rabbi David Kimhi wrote a book called Sefer HaShorashim (The Book of Roots), which contains about 2,000-2,500 roots and their definitions as found in the Scriptures.⁴ This demonstrates how condensed the Hebrew language is. Rather than viewing it as simplistic due to a significantly reduced vocabulary, we can view the words themselves as conveying meanings that are far more fluid and carry much more weight as individual words than in our English counterpart, where many more words and descriptors are required to convey somewhat the same meaning. Translation is always a compromise, and the wide range of translations demonstrates the ambiguity and fluidity of the Hebrew language.

Let’s explore one root, avar (consonants: A.B.R), and expand all the words formed out of this root.

We have provided a diagram for you to review. It is found online at: tinyurl.com/y3uawbs4

You’ll notice the diagram has 14 distinct words, each one carrying its own specific meaning. Some of the meanings greatly contrast with each other, by anything from “crossing” to “Hebrew,” “transgression,” “crossing place,” and even “pregnancy,” of all things.

Is this arbitrary, or does it have some deeper meaning? This question must be taken seriously, if we are to believe that “In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with G-d, and the Word was G-d.” (John 1:1 ESV). We must ascribe a high level of divinity to the words that G-d uses, and indeed what the Bible uses, especially in relation to the tongue of creation. This is the philosophy that Jewish scholars adopt when interpreting the Hebrew Bible to uncover the hidden meanings it carries.

Let’s investigate the word Ivri or “Hebrew” (part of the “Nouns” branch of the chart). We know it’s a noun and therefore a title. What’s interesting is that there is no explanation for the emergence of this title, unlike when Jacob is renamed Israel. We learn that Jacob earned the title “Yisrael” as a result of his wrestling an angel into the night and hence “Yisar El”—He who struggles with G-d, or more profoundly “Yashar El”—straight to G-d (Genesis 32:29). The co-existence of these simultaneous meanings is what colors the entire Hebrew Bible, invisible to the naked eye of the English reader.

It is therefore unusual that the first appearance of Ivri comes up without any introduction: “A fugitive brought the news to Avram the Hebrew, who was dwelling at the terebinths of Mamre, the Amorite, kinsman of Eshkol and Aner, these being Avram’s allies.” (Genesis 14:13, my translation).

This is when Avram is at war with the surrounding nations in the land of Cana’an, and a simple reading of this text would lead us to understand that the appearance of this title is simply to ethnically distinguish Avram from the other nations who have titles. The interesting thing is that Avram does have a heritage as a Chaldean, having been born in Ur of the Chaldees. Why then does the Bible ascribe a new title to Avram? Furthermore, other members of his close family, i.e., Laban, are titled “Aramean” (Genesis 25:20). Which one is it, Hebrew, Aramean or Chaldean?

Let’s not simply accept the text as is. There is a level of cognitive dissonance here which some mistakenly even call a “contradiction.” Every time we see something like this in the Hebrew Bible, we must investigate further. Here is where it gets interesting; Ivri, as we know, is a descriptor to the root of ever (side/region beyond) and avar in the verb form (crossing or passing through). In this form, the word Ivri can be understood as “a person from the other side,” but the other side of what? Why does Avram get ascribed this title? Simply put, we could understand this purely on a geographical level, where Ur is on the other side of the Jordan. We know that the language used around the opposite side of the Jordan is in reference to reaching the Promised Land through the phrase “Me’ever haYarden” (“From the opposite side of the Jordan”).⁵ So now Avram is on the other side of the Jordan, and among nations in the land of Cana’an. In other words, he is from the other side. An interesting answer, but does that explain why Ivri becomes a title for the chosen nation that is supposed to be a light to the world? How about another idea? The other side could be the other side of polytheism, or the antithesis to Sodom and Gomorrah. Avram left his homeland, remaking his life and passed through (avar) the Jordan and emerged into the Promised Land; this spiritual journey was a stage of spiritual incubation (mit’aber) with Abraham making a sacrifice to G-d each time he encountered a new challenge and overcame it.⁶ It is from the passing through (ivrut) of these tests that G-d gives Avram that Avram remakes himself, builds a new altar and reestablishes his faith and covenant with G-d. Therefore, he is called an Ivri. This identity of being made anew through covenant and sacrifice (through personal growth in the face of challenges) is what it means to be an Ivri (a Hebrew). While the linguistic peshat (simple understanding) of Ivri may denote an ethnic or geographic identity, this is what later Jewish tradition perceives within the shared root avar: a deeper spiritual metaphor. These readings operate at different interpretive levels and should not be confused with one another. Hence, it’s possible to interpret both on a purely grammatical/morphological level as well as on an abstract, metaphysical level at the same time. In other words, our understanding of the Hebrew language can be true on multiple levels at once.

Be Careful

We’ve seen how, from one root family, we can extract a deeper understanding of a seemingly confusing aspect (however small) of the Hebrew Bible. Having this understanding gives us the key to decoding not just one root at a time but to seeing the complete tapestry of associated meanings. This gives the text depth and makes it come alive. When in context, interpreting ambiguous texts is like decoding a secret code—examining all the ways the text can be framed and, as a result, understanding the plurality in the Shiv’im Panim (70 faces; a rabbinic concept that suggests that the text has multiple meanings).⁷ This inquisitive method of Jewish Scholars has led to textual insights (many of which have never been translated) that have incredible depth and application both in the Old and New Testaments. But, since they haven’t been translated, how can we use this information if we can’t read Hebrew today?

The root system, word studies, and inquisitive method of reading the Hebrew Bible are fascinating to many Christadelphians; however, interesting as they may be, they are fraught with danger for those who are not literate in Hebrew and who do not have a strong grasp of the complex grammatical system. Strong’s Concordance, which many use as a useful study tool, was published in 1890. It has been reprinted since, but has not been updated. Unfortunately, that makes this book extremely outdated. Even further, James Strong himself, however dedicated he may have been, was not a linguist, but rather a very passionate theologian. Strong’s lexical system assigned a number to each Hebrew word used to translate the KJV. This allowed users to see how the Hebrew word was translated. Unfortunately, many people don’t understand Hebrew roots and therefore see all the other occurrences in translation as definitions. This is a huge error as it doesn’t account for context or implicit meaning from the root structure, as we explored before. This misstep can lead people to form egregious misinterpretations when cherry-picking “definitions” that don’t really apply. It is important to recognize that often “word studies” in our ecclesial expositions might resemble an attempt to find the deeper meaning of the text. That’s a noble goal. But without an accurate understanding of the root and grammatical systems, too many errors can be made, leading to an incoherent interpretation woven from ideas rather than linguistic truth or even a mystical understanding of the original Hebrew.

Strong’s lexicon fundamentally fails to recognize the difference between highly similar forms of words with the same root, treating them as entirely different words with different Strong’s numbers. This is problematic if you are trying to do a word search or trying to find connections in the text, because you are not seeing the full picture. Furthermore, Strong’s extracts the lemma (word head; often confused with the root), and doesn’t give the actual Hebrew word used in the text, as many think. This step leads people to attempt to pronounce words that are not grammatically or morphologically coherent in Bible classes and exhortations. This situation is because Strong’s tries to strip the word to a simple form, which is an outdated method of analysis (remember, it was published in 1890). Today, we recognize that we must always view the word in its complete grammatical form. If we do not, a lemma approach allows manipulation of the meaning and completely misses the Hebrew binyanim (a grammatical framework we haven’t discussed).

Does this mean that all non-Hebrew speakers can’t reliably ever do Hebrew word study on something that piques their interest in the Bible? Absolutely not. It’s through the tools available to us that we can stay up to date with the best English-language information.

I strongly recommend using an interlinear Hebrew Bible for any serious Hebrew study. This version is useful because it preserves the Hebrew text unaltered alongside a hyper-literal English translation. This combination makes it grammatically challenging to follow, but it can be easily supplemented with your preferred Bible translation as a reference. If you wish to investigate further, Strong’s can be used to see where else this lemma occurs. When you view these sources, you will see that many words with identical Strong’s numbers are formed differently (with different prefixes and suffixes). This affects the meaning of the word, and therefore, you must consider the context. Using a more updated lexicon, such as the Hebrew and Aramaic Lexicon of the Old Testament (HALOT) or the Brown-Driver-Briggs Hebrew Lexicon (BDB), opens the opportunity for even greater analysis. You may be able to find versions of these lexicons that have some congruence with the Strong’s number system. Ultimately, however, I highly recommend learning to read Hebrew (you don’t have to learn to understand everything; learning how to read the characters themselves opens up many more tools). Even at a basic level, simply being able to identify letters will make your life much easier when looking up words. This pursuit may be much more time-consuming than a quick Strong’s lookup; however, as discussed, Strong’s is a method that is, frankly, outdated and inaccurate, leading to confusion at best and theological errors at worst.

While that may sound like a serious warning, we can also recognize what Hebrew opens up to us. Hebrew allows us to really appreciate the depth of what G-d has written. Ultimately, by spending some time learning about it, we can come to love its multiple meanings and develop a deeper understanding of how we can use our Bibles and the tools available to us to enrich our understanding of the Hebrew Bible and, by extension, the Bible as a whole.

Joshua Elrom,
Canterbury Ecclesia, VIC