"Muhammad is in the Bible!"
"I KNOW MUHAMMAD IS IN THE TORAH. A RABBI ADMITTED IT!!"
"Cognitive dissonance theory explains human behavior by positing that people have a bias to seek consonance between their expectations and reality. According to Festinger, people engage in a process he termed "dissonance reduction," which can be achieved in one of three ways: lowering the importance of one of the discordant factors, adding consonant elements, or changing one of the dissonant factors. This bias sheds light on otherwise puzzling, irrational, and even destructive behavior."
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cognitive_dissonance
___________________________________
1st thing first. I already know that if you realize that there is no mention of Muhammad in the Torah, you will consider it "proof" that the Torah has been corrupted. That would be the expected conclusion reached by someone suffering from cognitive dissonance in your situation. Cognitive dissonance is a main instigator of circular reasoning; but, "Who is valiant but he who overcomes his inclination."
On to your question:
("7" represents the Semitic consonant Hha or Hheth, which is a sound that does not exist in English. It's most similar to the letter "h." The sound of Aiyin is represented with a 3.)
The closest word to the word Muhammad that appears in the Torah is ta7mod, which means "shall desire." It appears, for example, in the "10 Commandments" as you shall not lust / desire....
There are other words that share the same root as the name Mu7ammad that are found elsewhere in the Hebrew Bible, but not in the Torah. The word that sounds the most similar is ma7mad, which literally means desirable, but is also used in the sense of something precious, valuable, or attractive. This word appears in the Book of Kings, as well as in the books of the prophet Ye7ez8el (Ezekiel) and of the prophet Hoshea3. It is also a word that you can still hear spoken in modern Hebrew. ...another related word, 7amud, is actually very frequently used even in modern Hebrew.... but, for whatever reason, when Muslims attempt to "prove" that Muhammad is in the Torah, they never quote appearances of this word. They only quote an appearance of the plural form of this word that appears in the book known as the "Song of Songs" or the "Song of Solomon," where it says "kulo ma7madim." --- they fail to realize several facts about their claim:
1) The Song of Songs is not part of the Torah.
2) The decision as to which books would be given special protection to ensure preservation was a decision made in the ancient Great Sanhedrin ("Mosaic Court"). There were members of that court who opposed the inclusion of the Song of Songs for reasons you'd probably agree with if you were to read this book.
3) The word ma7mad is an actual word in Hebrew -- it has a meaning and is used like any other word. If this sort of "proof" were acceptable, then Christians would have even greater "proof" of their claims because the Hebrew name of Jesus is Yeshua3, and there are numerous places where it says that "G-d is my yeshu3a (salvation)." So behold! "Proof" that Jesus is "G-d," (G-d forbid). ...after all, there are many examples of Yeshua3 being an actual name in the Hebrew Bible, but there are no examples of ma7mad being used as a name in the Hebrew Bible, nor any name that is even remotely similar to ma7mad. If the "Evil Jews" felt free to simply remove what they dislike from the Torah and had a vendetta against beautiful names given to non-Israelites, certainly they should have not preserved the beautiful name Yishma3'el... but they did. Heck, couldn't they have just erased Yishma3'el from the picture entirely? ...or remove all references in the Bible that record the corruptions of the people of Israel? ...if the people who have handed the Bible down to us generation after generation where the wicked Israelites... then why didn't they remove all references to their wickedness? Wouldn't it make sense for them to edit the text to paint themselves in the best light? ...the answer is that although the Hebrew Bible records corruptions of the people, it was not those same corrupt people who passed down the Hebrew Bible for us to read today -- it was the righteous Israelites who handed the Hebrew Bible down to us, those who opposed the corrupted Israelites.
4) The word ma7madim that appears in the Song of Songs, (plural form of ma7mad), also appears in plural form elsewhere. If this is the "obvious name of Muhammad," then why don't we consider it a reference to Muhammad in the other places this word appears as well?
5) If the text intends to say that it is Muhammad, then it would not say "kulo ma7madim" (literally: he is entirely beautiful / entirely attractive). It makes sense to say that something is entirely attractive.... but it does not make sense to say that he is entirely Muhammad, or entirely Joseph. You simply say "He is Muhammad" or "He is Joseph." ....if it is Muhammad, then of course he is entirely Muhammad. What? So a part of him is Muhammad and another part of him is Mary? ...or it's a person who might be part Muhammad and part butterfly or part tree... so that we have to say that he is entirely Muhammad and not just partially Muhammad? No. The word ma7madim means attractive, beautiful qualities.
6) It's in plural! I know you're gonna say it's because it's a "plural of honor and respect." I'm sorry... but show me an example in the Hebrew Bible where a human's name is given an abnormal plural form as a sign of respect. -- the only thing even close to this idea is the word elohim -- which, btw, is not plural for "G-d." Elohim is a word in and of itself that shares a root with the word El, but the plural of El is not Elohim. The plural of El is Elim. You could say that Elohim is a plural of Eloah, in which case you'd expect it to be Elohoth, not Elohim... but maybe it is one of those rare exceptions where the plural ending does not match the grammatical gender of the word. ...well... you might think it's one of those rare exceptions... were it not that the words Eloah and Elohim are used in clearly different manners. IN OTHER WORDS -- the "plural of honor" explanation for why ma7madim would be in plural even though you want it to refer to just one person is an explanation that does not hold water... So, why is it in plural? Because as the phrase states "KULO" -- he is altogether, it is referring to multiple factors, as indicated by the word "kul" (all). Ma7madim is plural because it is referring to the many desirable / attractive qualities of the character being referred to. It is a reference to his qualities / attributes -- not his name.
7) It's not even pronounced the same. *IF* Hebrew were not able to accurately represent the sounds of the Arabic name Muhammad, this would not be an issue. It would be expected that the Hebrew representation of the name would just be as close as it could get... but Hebrew is able to represent the sounds of the Arabic name Muhammad exactly... and yet ma7madim is not it. The 2nd 'm' is not geminated (doubled), vowel of the first syllable is not 'u', etc...
8) Anyone familiar with the Song of Songs knows that at face value, the main male character of the book is King Solomon. If someone reads metaphor into the book, as many people do, then it is indirectly a reference to G-d... or...... as Christians assert, it is a reference to Jesus. .....and so yet again it's a battle between Christians and Muslims as to whether it's in reference to their respective leaders -- when if we would only be objective.....
"Cognitive dissonance theory explains human behavior by positing that people have a bias to seek consonance between their expectations and reality. According to Festinger, people engage in a process he termed "dissonance reduction," which can be achieved in one of three ways: lowering the importance of one of the discordant factors, adding consonant elements, or changing one of the dissonant factors. This bias sheds light on otherwise puzzling, irrational, and even destructive behavior."
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cognitive_dissonance
___________________________________
1st thing first. I already know that if you realize that there is no mention of Muhammad in the Torah, you will consider it "proof" that the Torah has been corrupted. That would be the expected conclusion reached by someone suffering from cognitive dissonance in your situation. Cognitive dissonance is a main instigator of circular reasoning; but, "Who is valiant but he who overcomes his inclination."
On to your question:
("7" represents the Semitic consonant Hha or Hheth, which is a sound that does not exist in English. It's most similar to the letter "h." The sound of Aiyin is represented with a 3.)
The closest word to the word Muhammad that appears in the Torah is ta7mod, which means "shall desire." It appears, for example, in the "10 Commandments" as you shall not lust / desire....
There are other words that share the same root as the name Mu7ammad that are found elsewhere in the Hebrew Bible, but not in the Torah. The word that sounds the most similar is ma7mad, which literally means desirable, but is also used in the sense of something precious, valuable, or attractive. This word appears in the Book of Kings, as well as in the books of the prophet Ye7ez8el (Ezekiel) and of the prophet Hoshea3. It is also a word that you can still hear spoken in modern Hebrew. ...another related word, 7amud, is actually very frequently used even in modern Hebrew.... but, for whatever reason, when Muslims attempt to "prove" that Muhammad is in the Torah, they never quote appearances of this word. They only quote an appearance of the plural form of this word that appears in the book known as the "Song of Songs" or the "Song of Solomon," where it says "kulo ma7madim." --- they fail to realize several facts about their claim:
1) The Song of Songs is not part of the Torah.
2) The decision as to which books would be given special protection to ensure preservation was a decision made in the ancient Great Sanhedrin ("Mosaic Court"). There were members of that court who opposed the inclusion of the Song of Songs for reasons you'd probably agree with if you were to read this book.
3) The word ma7mad is an actual word in Hebrew -- it has a meaning and is used like any other word. If this sort of "proof" were acceptable, then Christians would have even greater "proof" of their claims because the Hebrew name of Jesus is Yeshua3, and there are numerous places where it says that "G-d is my yeshu3a (salvation)." So behold! "Proof" that Jesus is "G-d," (G-d forbid). ...after all, there are many examples of Yeshua3 being an actual name in the Hebrew Bible, but there are no examples of ma7mad being used as a name in the Hebrew Bible, nor any name that is even remotely similar to ma7mad. If the "Evil Jews" felt free to simply remove what they dislike from the Torah and had a vendetta against beautiful names given to non-Israelites, certainly they should have not preserved the beautiful name Yishma3'el... but they did. Heck, couldn't they have just erased Yishma3'el from the picture entirely? ...or remove all references in the Bible that record the corruptions of the people of Israel? ...if the people who have handed the Bible down to us generation after generation where the wicked Israelites... then why didn't they remove all references to their wickedness? Wouldn't it make sense for them to edit the text to paint themselves in the best light? ...the answer is that although the Hebrew Bible records corruptions of the people, it was not those same corrupt people who passed down the Hebrew Bible for us to read today -- it was the righteous Israelites who handed the Hebrew Bible down to us, those who opposed the corrupted Israelites.
4) The word ma7madim that appears in the Song of Songs, (plural form of ma7mad), also appears in plural form elsewhere. If this is the "obvious name of Muhammad," then why don't we consider it a reference to Muhammad in the other places this word appears as well?
5) If the text intends to say that it is Muhammad, then it would not say "kulo ma7madim" (literally: he is entirely beautiful / entirely attractive). It makes sense to say that something is entirely attractive.... but it does not make sense to say that he is entirely Muhammad, or entirely Joseph. You simply say "He is Muhammad" or "He is Joseph." ....if it is Muhammad, then of course he is entirely Muhammad. What? So a part of him is Muhammad and another part of him is Mary? ...or it's a person who might be part Muhammad and part butterfly or part tree... so that we have to say that he is entirely Muhammad and not just partially Muhammad? No. The word ma7madim means attractive, beautiful qualities.
6) It's in plural! I know you're gonna say it's because it's a "plural of honor and respect." I'm sorry... but show me an example in the Hebrew Bible where a human's name is given an abnormal plural form as a sign of respect. -- the only thing even close to this idea is the word elohim -- which, btw, is not plural for "G-d." Elohim is a word in and of itself that shares a root with the word El, but the plural of El is not Elohim. The plural of El is Elim. You could say that Elohim is a plural of Eloah, in which case you'd expect it to be Elohoth, not Elohim... but maybe it is one of those rare exceptions where the plural ending does not match the grammatical gender of the word. ...well... you might think it's one of those rare exceptions... were it not that the words Eloah and Elohim are used in clearly different manners. IN OTHER WORDS -- the "plural of honor" explanation for why ma7madim would be in plural even though you want it to refer to just one person is an explanation that does not hold water... So, why is it in plural? Because as the phrase states "KULO" -- he is altogether, it is referring to multiple factors, as indicated by the word "kul" (all). Ma7madim is plural because it is referring to the many desirable / attractive qualities of the character being referred to. It is a reference to his qualities / attributes -- not his name.
7) It's not even pronounced the same. *IF* Hebrew were not able to accurately represent the sounds of the Arabic name Muhammad, this would not be an issue. It would be expected that the Hebrew representation of the name would just be as close as it could get... but Hebrew is able to represent the sounds of the Arabic name Muhammad exactly... and yet ma7madim is not it. The 2nd 'm' is not geminated (doubled), vowel of the first syllable is not 'u', etc...
8) Anyone familiar with the Song of Songs knows that at face value, the main male character of the book is King Solomon. If someone reads metaphor into the book, as many people do, then it is indirectly a reference to G-d... or...... as Christians assert, it is a reference to Jesus. .....and so yet again it's a battle between Christians and Muslims as to whether it's in reference to their respective leaders -- when if we would only be objective.....
No comments:
Post a Comment