Saturday, November 7, 2015

Eth-Cepher: A Wacky New “Translation”

A friend of mine who just got back from an archaeological dig in Israel and is studying Semitic languages at Rutgers sent me a link to this errr…“translation” as a joke.
From Pidgeon's website

The Hebrew word ETH means 'divine'?

The front page of the translator's website asserts that his is the only English translation in the universe that renders the Hebrew word את. We read:

“The Hebrew word את (eth in English) means divine, and the Hebrew word ספר (cepher in English) means book; hence, the את Eth-CEPHER is the ‘Divine Book.’”

Sorry boys and girls, the Hebrew word את doesn’t get translated because it’s the Hebrew accusative marker.  It’s the most common independent word in the Hebrew language. To translate it as ‘divine’ is goofy.  Want proof?  Here ya go:

Ezekiel 4:15:
"Then he said to me, ‘See, I assign to you את cow's dung instead of human dung, on which you may prepare your bread’

If eth means ‘divine’ then cow excrement is divine in Ezekiel 4:15. In Leviticus 11:7 the את is placed before swine, and in Leviticus 15:3 Pidgeon’s claim would render a plague on the skin being inspected for leprosy divine:

“and the priest shall examine the את diseased area on the skin of his body.”

Pictographic Silliness:

Skin diseases, swine and cow droppings! Most objects in the Bible that function in the accusative can thus be translated with the adjective ‘divine’ if the author is serious about this claim. But on what basis does he assert it?  He horoscopes the idea outta the original pictographs on which paleo-Hebrew was derived.  This method (which is so popular on the internet) is so subjective that you can literally create any new meaning you want for a Hebrew word.  You might as well break out the tarot cards and ouija board if you are going to be using this chart to interpret the “real” meanings of words in your Bible. Sorry everyone, Semitic philology is a much less sexy process.

Let me be emphatic.  You CANNOT derive meanings from the pictographic origins of Biblical Hebrew anymore than you can with words in modern English.  The Hebrew language developed independent of the Phoenician alphabet system and merely adopted it to represent the sounds of their already existing language.  The Israelites attached no significance to the ancient derivatives of their alphabet anymore than we or the Greeks did. To misunderstand this is to demonstrate a profound ignorance of how Israelite chronology and language-in-general works.

In the words of Michael Brown, who has a PhD in Semitic languages from New York University: “…we have no business attaching pictographic meanings to ancient Hebrew [anymore] than we have attaching those same pictographic meanings to the Greek alphabet or to our English alphabet.” 

Revelation was written in Hebrew?

Totally off-topic, but apparently this stands in the Holy city. My
Southern theology professor comments, "I didn't know the
temple still stood in Jerusalem."
The author also translates eth as ‘divine’ as an elaboration of the claim that Revelation was originally written in Hebrew.  What evidence does he give that Revelation was composed in Hebrew?  Well, John does give the Hebrew names of some places in the book.

I don’t know of a single New Testament scholar on earth holding a university chair who defends the idea. (Revelation is highly dependent on the Greek Septuagint.)  By the same logic, we could say that Josephus must have originally written his Antiquities in Hebrew since he transliterates it on occasion. (He was commissioned by Greek speaking gentiles.)  This argument is a hopeless mess of a non-sequitur.

All that Sacred Name stuff:

At 4-4:45 in his video he tells us when Jesus said, “I have come in my Father’s name, and you do not receive me” that he was referring to the inability of the Jews to pronounce a set of vowels and consonants.  Anyone who turns to John 5 will quickly see that Jesus was not referring in that passage to the morphological reconstruction of the Hebrew name for God.  He was referring, rather, to the fact that the Jews wanted to kill him because he was claiming the authority of God.

I don’t know how far the author takes this name theology. Some messianic types can go so far that they court a different gospel with it. (I.e. they literally teach that you have to be vocalizing a certain set of sounds to really be worshiping God.) But, I want to impress on the reader that it is almost totally unimportant. I’ve spent years taking Biblical language courses. I’m not saying the languages aren’t important.

What I am saying is the New Testament authors didn’t even feel the need to ostentatiously transliterate the Hebrew names for God. They simply use the word theos—the same word used to refer to the members of the Greek pantheon. When it came to Jesus, they didn’t pedantically spell out YAHUSHUA or anything of the sort. They just threw down a common Hesus and called it a day.  When Jesus prayed he called God Elah in Aramaic. *gasp* sounds Islamic!

Moral of the story: don’t run around trying to be holier than the Bible, transliterating everything needlessly into Hebrew. It can get annoying. God cares about whether we are receiving the content the language conveys, not the arbitrary set of sounds we vocalize it in. If you constantly interchange common Biblical names with Hebrew where English would function just as well, you aren't communicating. You're self-advertising how smart you think you are, and you're trying to be more Biblical than the Bible.

If you want a really good translation of a book like Genesis, I highly recommend Robert Alter. (He’s professor of Hebrew at Berkeley.)  It’s by far the best I have ever seen in the English language, and the clever nuances he is able to bring out of the text are a joy to read.



  1. gasp sounds Islamic? sorry that you are so satanic you do not understand god's name or care in the slightest about the truth. just worship satan? zeus? or nimrod? and call it a day.

  2. (1) "Let me be emphatic. You CANNOT derive meanings from the pictographic origins of Biblical Hebrew anymore than you can with words in modern English..."

    (2) "...This method (which is so popular on the internet) is so subjective that you can literally create any new meaning you want for a Hebrew word."

    (1) sure you can
    (2) not really

    I don't know the final truth of all these things, but the pictographs do lend themselves to intuitive understanding, and these understandings tend to inform the definitions of the Hebrew words they combine to create.

  3. yes and why does he spell cepher with a c instead of sepher as in all English translations of the Hebrew word? for some sort of know it all smugness? further more he uses exclusively the m.t. Masoretic text only and states it's word for word with the dss, septuaigint which it is not. its close but not exact as Hebrew scholar at univ. of florida Kenneth Hansen states and others, exactly and not exactly are very different especially when the mt disagrees on, guess what surprise, passages related to the messiah. don't get me wrong that this is a terrible 'bible' but it's not entirely accurate. I won't ever discourage him or others in seeking the truth but this is not a know it all end of the matter translation by any means.

  4. For People with English as a Secondary Language: What wacky results were you given when you tried to use Google Translate for English words?

  5. I am amaze that anyone would take this much time to speak against a translation of the Bible, even King James is a Translation, so what are you hiding by coming up so strongly against this translation. I have read it, and until you read it for yourself don't take the word of anyone else about the Divine Book called the CEPHER, and while you are doing research to discredit others look up and research Jesus Christ, that might be the real secret behind all of what you are doing.

  6. I encourage anyone who has read this far, to go to the Cepher website and check the wording that the writer of this blog got his info from. It's not hard to find. You'll see that this is 100% FAKE NEWS and that the writer has distorted the wording to have something to ridicule. Not good. Not good at all.