TruthVid's 100 Proofs that the Israelites were White, Part 73: 97, Similarities of words in European languages with Hebrew, continued
TruthVid's 100 Proofs that the Israelites were White, Part 73
This is now part three of our discussion of the Hebrew language and its relationship to the languages of Europe, which for us is mostly limited to English along with some Latin and Greek. We hope to have already demonstrated that many common everyday words which are found in each of these languages are similar or even identical to Hebrew words in both sound and meaning. Of course, words which only sound similar but have unrelated meanings can and should be dismissed as being coincidental. But when a great variety of words are practically identical in both sound and meaning, the implications cannot be overlooked -- especially since there are also a great number of broader cultural similarities and historical links between these same nations. Once these links are acknowledged, we find that language connections between the ancient Israelites and the nations of Europe go far beyond the fact that those nations use a Hebrew/Phoenician alphabet, and that these languages must be directly related, and were even derived or descended from Hebrew, albeit with other ancient influences. Here we shall continue that discussion.
Before we begin, we should discuss our presentation of these 100 Proofs in general. Here I would have to admit not having been a very good accountant. This list, and the order in which it has been presented, has gone through many changes, additions, and permutations as we had proceeded. So often, I neglected to change the numbering of the proofs as I began my writing. While I already admitted having to Proofs numbered 37, Truthvids recently discovered that I had mistakenly reused numbers in the 60’s on five occasions. We would never get to 100 at that rate. Therefore, since I rarely mention the numeration of the Proofs in these podcasts, I decided to renumber them to correct those more recent errors. So this current proof on the similarities of words in number 97, and not 92 as I had it when we began. The papers at Christogenea have been corrected to reflect the appropriate numbers.
After our last presentation, a friend located for me PDF copies of the books which I could not locate, but I have not yet had a chance to make good use of them. I am speaking of the books by the Jew Saul Levin who had published two volumes, Semitic and Indo-European: The Principal Etymologies (1995) and Semitic and Indo-European Volume II: Comparative morphology, syntax and phonetics (2002). As soon as I get an opportunity, I will study his etymologies and comparisons and estimate their merit and usefulness in relation to our own assertions. Even if the information comes from a Jew, if it stands up to inspection then we may find it of use. In our modern academic environment, it is difficult to study any Hebrew without the hand of one devil or another being in the mix. Of course, the work of John Pairman Brown was influenced and is in part derived from that of Levin.
In the first few parts of our presentation of this subject, we spoke of Brown and Levin, and also of another Jew named Joseph Yahuda, an academic and lawyer who wrote a book asserting that Hebrew is Greek. That claims seems outlandish on the surface, but there are actually many cognate words and other similarities between Hebrew and Greek. But before we depart from this subject, we should mention that certain European scholars were also making very similar assertions long before any of these more recent scholars whom we have mentioned. At Christogenea we have long had electronic copies of some of their books available. Discoveries in Hebrew, Gaelic, Gothic, Anglo-Saxon, Basque was published by Allison Emery Drake in 1907. The author was billed as a “sometime university fellow in Anglo-Saxon in Columbia University”. But long before that, The Eastern Origin of the Celtic Nations was published by James Cowles Prichard at Oxford in 1836. Both of these works are comparitive studies, mostly philological in nature, which show definite relationships between early European languages and Hebrew.
If we had no books or histories, perhaps in a thousand years the English would deny any connections to the Germans, and whatever language similarities are left would be dismissed by Anglophiles as coincidences. So it is with Hebrews and Europeans, as the Jews have scoffed at or ignored all of these assertions , and Europeans have no books until the early Greeks started writing, at a time when the true Israelites had already been taken into captivity.
97) Similarities of words in European languages with Hebrew, continued.
When I encountered the Greek word σμύρνα for a recent presentation of our commentary on the Revelation, I thought to take the opportunity to defend my connection of the Greek verb σφάλλω, or sphallo, which is to make to fall, with the Hebrew verb naphal, which is to fall. The name Smyrna, which was the name of a Greek city mentioned in the Revelation, is from the Greek word σμύρνα which is ointment, and particularly myrrh, which was used for anointing. But the older Aeolic Greek form of the word was μύρρα, which corresponds more precisely to the Hebrew and it is evident that the initial letter ‘s’ must have been added later, which the Greeks had also done with certain other words. So it is evident that the same incident very likely occurred with σφάλλω, that the initial ‘s’ was added as the language evolved.
Sources for discussion:
Please click here for our mailing list sign-up page.
