Re: Is the Semites' letter Aleph, meaning "ox", related to their god "El"?
Posted: Wed Jan 31, 2018 4:57 pm
Hal:
There’s no evidence that the first letter was chosen to show an association of a bull with God. None at all. If anything, it’s a picture of domestic bliss.
We don’t have a history of the alphabet, as it was developed for writing on parchment with ink. We have a few places where there is graffiti scratched into stone, graffiti that dates back to when Israel was in slavery in Egypt,
The first example we have of Israel associating a bull with God is after the Exodus, long after when we have examples of the alphabet. Then Moses derisively calls it a “calf” עגל
The male of a cow is פר but when a raging, dangerous and powerful bull is mentioned, it’s שור. That’s the next to the last letter of the alphabet. In contrast, an אלף is a domesticated animal, not dangerous at all.
I would say that this theory is not so much coincidence, as the attempts of moderns to denigrate Biblical teachings, to twist them to fit their beliefs.
I reject answers based on “proto-Semitic” because there’s no evidence that there ever was such a language.
I especially reject demonic theories such as the Kabbalah.
Moses wrote in the second half of the 15th century BC. There’s evidence that the alphabet predated Moses by centuries. Tanakh consistently condemns the worshipping of a bull as a god. As a result, there’s no evidence that the first letter of the alphabet is connected with an association of a bull with God.
I previously said you’re like a bulldog, you just won’t let go. That can be good, or bad. But here there’s no evidence to back up your question, and it would be better to let go.
All the best, Karl W. Randolph.
This statement is false. I don’t know how else to say it, but that when something is false, it’s false.PakoBckuu wrote:… What is curious to me about this is that the first letter that they chose to start their alphabet was also a picture of the animal that they associated with God, the bull.
There’s no evidence that the first letter was chosen to show an association of a bull with God. None at all. If anything, it’s a picture of domestic bliss.
We don’t have a history of the alphabet, as it was developed for writing on parchment with ink. We have a few places where there is graffiti scratched into stone, graffiti that dates back to when Israel was in slavery in Egypt,
The first example we have of Israel associating a bull with God is after the Exodus, long after when we have examples of the alphabet. Then Moses derisively calls it a “calf” עגל
The male of a cow is פר but when a raging, dangerous and powerful bull is mentioned, it’s שור. That’s the next to the last letter of the alphabet. In contrast, an אלף is a domesticated animal, not dangerous at all.
Guess again.PakoBckuu wrote:I guess that this connection is not a coincidence.
I would say that this theory is not so much coincidence, as the attempts of moderns to denigrate Biblical teachings, to twist them to fit their beliefs.
Theories based on beliefs with no evidence to back them up are not worth the paper they’re written on.PakoBckuu wrote:But I don't know how one would prove otherwise, since you rightly said that the history of the alphabet-making has been lost.
In Letter Perfect: The Marvelous History of Our Alphabet From A to Z, David Sacks theorizes:
I reject answers based on “proto-Semitic” because there’s no evidence that there ever was such a language.
I especially reject demonic theories such as the Kabbalah.
Moses wrote in the second half of the 15th century BC. There’s evidence that the alphabet predated Moses by centuries. Tanakh consistently condemns the worshipping of a bull as a god. As a result, there’s no evidence that the first letter of the alphabet is connected with an association of a bull with God.
I previously said you’re like a bulldog, you just won’t let go. That can be good, or bad. But here there’s no evidence to back up your question, and it would be better to let go.
All the best, Karl W. Randolph.