How to be saved: only believe Christ paid for your sins. Done. Salvation cannot be lost, even if you stop believing.

Salvation 1 John 1:9 Poetic Meter Chapter Studies Articles Resources Info

Three-Way Hebrew Converter

An example of what I mean with the hieroglyphs, and a snippet of Genesis 1:1-5 in the Hebrew for comparison:

Glyph Conversion Chart (V1.2)

Here is the full chart displaying the modern Ashuri Hebrew characters compared to the older characters until it reaches the Egyptian glyphs that inspired the characters, along with a description of what they were originally implying. Anything in red text is what I'm doubtful of. Of course this is my interpretation of the glyphs and I've done my best to associate them based on multiple sources. For instance, while you could use "𓃸" for Kuf, "𓃻" makes more sense based on the Proto-Sinaitic representation of a figure 8 where the baboon is in a sitting pose. And while dalet is sometimes a door (𓉿), I've opted for its fish variant. This is where Proto-Sinaitic gets tricky as sometimes multiple hieroglyphs were sometimes used to reference one thing. I updated the chart to include all of the 'secondary' hieroglyphs. If I encounter any problems with this interpretation I will update it accordingly. Some Proto-Sinaitic was very similar to the 𓉔 hieroglyph (they were probably used interchangeably) but the converter only uses the 'primary' glyphs.

There's a shockingly large void of Proto-Sinaitic material so some of the characters have some variances on that front as well; it's rather curious as at some point there'd have been an overwhelming amount of documents written in Proto-Sinaitic and perhaps even just with the Egyptian hieroglyphs themselves, but why this historical void exists is anyone's guess.

As a result of Egypt's strong influence and cross-pollination to both the writing and Hebrew pronunciations, I do not believe "Vav" ever had a V and was originally Waw. This sound would have been unusual in Ancient Egypt as it didn't exist according to what we know about Egyptian, so too, it wouldn't make sense to exist for the Hebrew, either. I know this topic is hotly debated but from an academic, scientific, and cultural perspective having a V does not make sense.

Glyph Revision History

1.1 Changes

1. I had heth as 𓉗 (fence/perimeter), but going through the hieroglyphs 𓈇 looks to be a lot closer. It's an irrigation canal. There's also a plain canal "𓈘" which is close, too. It appears the inspiration for this was actually an (irrigation) canal and not a regular enclosure or fence, when William Foxwell Albright suggested a fence he wasn't sure himself. A canal is the most logical choice although the representation of a fence/perimeter 𓊐 is also quite visually similar 𓈈 so maybe there was a connection at some point? Some said heth should be "𓎛"; as this is just a wick I think it was probably just used for the "h" sound and not a pictographic relationship when being used.
2. I had zayin as 𓏭 due to reference from another source, but looking at the hieroglyphs myself, this is definitely matching to 𓏱 (both the Proto-Sinaitic pictogram and Egyptian meaning of this glyph), it's so obvious that I don't know why sources don't immediately notice this? A notable mention is the pitchfork as well 𓍡.

1.2 Changes

3. I changed 𓋾 to 𓋿. While Proto-Sinaitic sometimes used both, the original concept was for a flock, and the Egyptian royal sceptre (𓋾) is in essence quite different from the literal Shepherd's crook (𓋿); modern audiences may gloss over this historical nuance. I never paid close attention when people were referencing the Egyptian sceptre as the Shepherd's crook, so that's on me for blindly using the sceptre. Both kind of pertain to authority, though -- and that's where Proto-Sinaitic gets confusing when it referenced simultaneous concepts.
4. Overhauled and aligned the descriptions against Gardiner's, also added secondary glyphs and their meanings. My additions to Yodh appear to be novel; the visual similarities and even meanings seem to align. My additions to Waw appear to be novel, but 𓎗 is visually similar, I do not think it should apply to Kuf. I do not think Shin actually references "breast" and "tooth" but I left tooth because if Heth had some sort of legacy association with 𓊐, maybe the same applies to Shin? Some of these references are mirrored in the Mathers table which adds to their suspiciousness. It also happens to reverse the meaning of certain hieroglyphs; for instance Nun becomes fish and for "faithfulness" which is the opposite of its Egyptian 'snake' meaning (and since it's used for Satan it's easy to 'proof' much of these meanings came later or were changed thousands of years after the fact). So the Kabbalah references are predictably garbled or unreliable at best and should not be consulted.

Dating

If we were to assume portions of the Old Testament were written first in Proto-Sinaitic before it moved onto Ktav Ivri and ultimately into Masoretic, this is how I would date it accordingly:

• Proto-Sinaitic 1450 BC
• Ktav Ivri / Paleo-Hebrew 1000 BC
• Ktav Ashuri 500 BC
• Ashuri Masoretic Addtions 500 AD

Keep in mind this is under the assumption it was first written in Proto-Sinaitic, as there currently exist no proof it's only hypothetical. Considering Egyptian writing and culture were prevalent during Moses and Joseph, it's not out of the realm of possibility multiple writing systems were interchanged and people 'just knew' the pictograms of all of them back then. There's also nothing saying that portions of the Old Testament was written in just one of the writing systems, it could have been multiples before being consolidated into Ashuri. Unfortunately as Antiochus IV Epiphanes destroyed many Old Testament manuscripts and the Jews continue to be persecuted throughout history, not many copies of anything remain. Without the Leningrad Codex much would have been lost.

To the Goofballs and Conspiratorialists

Unfortunately as I was researching this, there are apparently some Christians who get nutty and start modifying the symbols to selectively bend to what they want to imagine (that also goes against the Egyptian, I might add) or then claim God has hidden meanings: there's never going to be hidden meaning with the pictograms they'll always be obvious and in the open related to the vocabulary they're to represent. In fact, claiming God was hiding knowledge is exactly what Satan used to tempt Eve: so Christians saying God is hiding anything is basically promoting Satan's temptation.

I think some of this ties into the aforementioned Kabbalah references, but that's a dark path to go down: it's not scientific and will eventually make you crazy seeing meanings where there are none. Just don't. Move onto something more productive in your life.

Speculating Ancient Hebrew Pictogram Relationships

While I was initially extremely hesitant to acknowledge there was an association with the vocabulary and pictograms (I only wanted to see what it would have 'looked like' with the inspired hieroglyphs), it does appear that there is. I kept seeing so many that I'm confident is saying it's no longer a coincidence. Even with my first revision of the Hebrew-to-Egyptian glyphs, I have noticed some interesting things when inputting a few famous Hebrew words.

Satan: שטן 𓆓𓄤𓌔

For 'Satan': the beginning glyph is a composite bow (which can refer to "stretching out"), the centre glyph means 'beauty' or 'good' and then the ending glyph is a snake, almost like it's saying: 'good' which is being 'stretched out' that has turned into evil (snake), or, beauty that masquerades as a snake. I'm just guessing, but the contrast of having both good/evil in one word like that is too much of a coincidence to ignore. Originally I thought the bow may have referred to Satan placing a target on our backs, but I think that's too much of a leap of logic with a modern bias.

Elohim: אלהים 𓈖𓂝𓀠𓋿𓃾

For 'Elohim' it begins with an ox head followed by a cane seemingly implying that it's God who shepherds (𓀠𓋿𓃾) us all? And for the hand giving water, God is the one who gives the water of life (𓈖𓂝)?

Hallelujah: הללו־יה 𓀠𓂝־𓌉𓋿𓋿𓀠

Hallelujah begins and terminates with one of the cheering 'worshippers'.

Rechem: רחם 𓈖𓈇𓁶

The word "rechem" refers to womb, and the pictograms for this one are actually probably the most related to any I've seen thus far. It starts off with the 'head' followed by (irrigation) canals leading into water. If that's not an allusion to the process of birth, I don't know what is!

Shabbat: שבת 𓏴𓉐𓌔

'Sabbath' almost seems like it's depicting the following: do not stretch yourself by not resting (composite bow), stay inside (house), do not leave until the right time has passed (cross). I looked this up after I completed my interpretation so I would not have bias, Jeff Benner's interpretation is: "return to the covenant" (using the "tooth" and "tent" to refer to pressing and therefore return). I'm not convinced the composite bow ever referred to "tooth" but rather "stretching". The sabbath was really about resting so staying home to not "stretch yourself" makes way more sense.

Adamah & Adam: אדמה & אדם
𓈖𓆟𓃾 & 𓀠𓈖𓆟𓃾

It's interesting to me how both Adam and Adamah have two of the animals (of whom Adam originally named), along with Adamah even terminating with a little man. "Adam" itself is a bit of a joke meaning "earth-man".

Qol "voice of God": קוֹל 𓋿𓌉𓃻

Qadosh "Holy 3x": קָד֛וֹשׁ 𓌔𓌉𓆟𓃻

I'm wondering if many of the words associated with God, have baboons simply for the humour factor. God being the author of humour, often uses it to communicate to people when they get too close minded.

Ets: עֵץ 𓇑𓁹

It's interesting that the word for tree "ets" has an eye 'looking' at a plant. The hieroglyphic meaning would be: "to (make) germinate".

Obviously these are not 'hidden meanings' as the pictograms only appear to augment the vocabulary itself. If you think about ancient cultures back then, associating pictograms would have also made it more obvious to people who may have not been formally educated. You don't need to learn proprietary vocabulary, you can just stare at the picture to see what it means visibly in the open, nothing hidden about it. If someone showed me the pictograms for 𓆓𓄤𓌔, and I was familiar with them during the period, it's pretty obvious to see at a glance how that would refer to Satan. In modern times where everyone is educated to read and write none of this is necessary anymore, so it only serves as a historical curiosity and glimpse of cultures in the past.

Selective Historiography: Not Phoenician, Not Arabic

Revisionist history through linguistic imperialism appears to be a common malady when scholars discuss Paleo-Hebrew. Dominant academic narratives tend to prioritise calling it Phoenician; advising this is what inspired Paleo-Hebrew rather than the other way around -- despite physical evidence proving the contrary. For instance, the oldest known Paleo-Hebrew on the Ketef Hinnom scrolls (600 BC) predates the oldest Phoenician ostraca (at a suggestive 510 BC ~ 323 BC). Stone itself cannot be used for objective dating because the medium predates when it was written to: perfect for selective historiography, though! So all of the academic suggestions of Phoenician written on stone predating the Paleo-Hebrew is an assumption. Not to mention, there's already Paleo-Hebrew written to stone... like the Siloam inscription (guesstimated at 700 BC), or the Tel Dan stele (guesstimated at 870 BC ~ 750 BC). Of course they guesstimate the Phoenician Ahiram sarcophagus at a much more generous 1000 BC 🤣. I could bring up the Izbet Sartah ostracon (1200 BC ~ 901 BC), but surprise, even this is contested if it's Hebrew at all. I'm certain the Ketef Hinnom scrolls were a source of anger for many who want a different narrative about Hebrew.

Since the pictograms line up with the ancient Hebrew, this is decent proof Proto-Sinaitic/Paleo-Hebrew was of Jewish origin and not Phoenician as some journalists with an antisemitic bias or the World Economic Forum claim; the alphabet itself appears to have been designed around Hebrew and anything that loans Hebrew words. The later languages (which is pretty much all) that borrowed Paleo-Hebrew and Proto-Sinaitic lost that intrinsic pictographic-vocabulary relationship. Except in certain areas where Phoenician borrows from ancient Hebrew (i.e. taking "Elohim" and shortening it into just "El"). It's also suspiciously on-brand for how antisemitic the world is regarding Jewish history and culture. The ancient people of the past would have been familiar with these hieroglyphs no doubt, and obviously the Israelites were influenced and influenced others; but the Paleo-Hebrew is of Jewish origin without doubt. Everything else that came much later (yes, even Arabic) was influenced from the ancient Hebrew. The earliest preserved Arabic (that's not stone) is PERF 558 from 643 AD.

The linguistic genocide of Hebrew doesn't stop at scholars trying to pass the Paleo-Hebrew gylphs off as Phoenician in origin. A modern example: how Ta'anakh in Palestine (תַּעְנַךְ) was renamed Ti'inik (تعنّك). A deliberate revision through Arabic that resembles the original ancient Hebrew just enough: a post-facto overlay with the intent to revise history. They had a choice to invent a new novel Arabic word, and they didn't. This same post-facto overlay tactic is what Russia uses against Ukraine, renaming Kyiv to Kiev. Russia could have created a whole new word or aligned the transliteration of Kyiv to Кийив if they wanted to get creative using their set of Cyrillic characters. But guess what! Ки́їв is still standard Cyrillic! They want to eradicate "ї" so that their flavour of Cyrillic is what's remembered and becomes the de facto).

When designing this converter, it was never my intention to investigate how Jewish history was being obfuscated or rewritten (and I never thought much of calling Paleo-Hebrew, "Phoenician". In fact, I thought it was Phoenician from what most sources were saying). One thing lead to another with obvious inconsistencies in mainstream academia, and I came to the above startling conclusions through a scientific and organic process.