Addendum to my Elohim Sitchin Searches

I recently had a request from a user of our software (Logos/Libronix) for the search I created as part of the video Imade on elohim in the Hebrew Bible–which shows point-blank that Zecharia Sitchin is completely wrong with respect to what he says about elohim.  Alas, I deleted my search and can’t reproduce it exactly since the video cuts off a few lines of it. But not to worry for anyone out there who would like the searches (and who have the software, obviously).

Below are two new searches. I’ve simplified the parameters a bit, and so the result numbers aren’t exactly what the video shows. I don’t feel like redoing the video (the site is what needs my attention).  Just click on the links and you’ll be able to donwload the files in Libronix.  Put them at My Documents/Libronix DLS/SyntaxQueries.  If you don’t have the syntax query folder, it’s because you never saved one of your own (you’ll have to go to Search>Syntax Search in Libronix and make one up and save it to first create that folder).

Search 1: Elohim as a noun and the subject of a third masculine singular finite verb (367 occurrences). Download the file HERE by right clicking and choosing “Save Link As”.  Make sure you put it in the folder described above AND that the extension of the file is *.lbxstq (downloading it off the blog and saving may change it to a text file, which is no good in Libronix).

Search 2: same as above but I added ha-elohim as a subject (elohim + definite article; 465 occurrences). Download the file HERE by right clicking and choosing “Save Link As”. Make sure you put it in the folder described above AND that the extension of the file is *.lbxstq (downloading it off the blog and saving may change it to a text file, which is no good in Libronix).

8 thoughts on “Addendum to my Elohim Sitchin Searches

  1. Thank you Dr. Heiser. If I can figure out the original query, I’ll send a download link. -John

  2. Dr. Heiser: I have created the syntax query below that does return 322 results, but I have not compared the results with your original PDF. Well, it’s a start: Elohim as subject of a SINGULAR predicator. I’m hoping to create a link here so that a user doesn’t just put the link into a browser, but I don’t know what’s allowed in these comments. If comments accept html, then follow Dr. Heiser’s post instructions above to save the virus- and spyware-free file to your hard drive per above. If this doesn’t work, then Dr. Heiser or I may be able to do something for you. -John

  3. I was interested in running the last video query: Plural Verb + Elohim (CCB), but my results of course did not tally with yours again. I would like to know if when you run this query, you also get 5 hits. I’m not sure if the mistake is mine, or if, as I noticed, the AFAT morphology is noun masculine singular normal and the other 4 versions of the Hebrew Bible in Logos I have show noun masculine plural absolute. Interesting.

  4. @Dispraxis: oops – my bad; this is a different query. Yes, this query yields five. Morphologies differ on this word (and many others). It has to do with “tagging philosophy” (e.g., are you tagging only form as a rule, or function? do you believe there are such things as adjectives, or are those just uses of nouns?). There are other occurrences of plural predicate with elohim besides these five, but they can only be found with other queries.

  5. Dr. Heiser: thanks for that information. I’m relatively new to building and using syntax queries, and you’ve shown me I still have much to learn. If I’m not mistaken, the new Stuttgart Electronic Study Bible (SESB), Version 3.0 Upgrade would add additional database(s?) to the ones available, but alas, I can’t afford to upgrade from v. 2 right now. I highly recommend Logos to anyone who crosses my path, over Bibleworks, Bibloi, Gramcord, PC Study Bible, Wordsearch, Quickverse, etc., all of which (and more) I own, Also, thanks for your work as Academic Editor of Bible Study Magazine, but again, finances require I let my subscription lapse. Perhaps things will improve for everyone! -John

  6. @Dispraxis: Yes on the SESB (which is now in version 3, I believe). No problem on the subscription!

Comments are closed.