Talk:Zaphnath-Paaneah

LXX and Hex

I would think it would be easier for people to understand if we broke the LXX and Hexapla versions into two parentheticals instead of just one following "Septuagint" which conditionally combines them. Right now it is listed as "(Ψον[or Ψομ]θομφανήχ)" but I think separating them into "(Ψονθομφανήχ)" and "(Ψομθομφανήχ)" respectively would be more clearly understood (plus you know which version comes from which). Is there any objection? The only one I can think that someone might have is it clutters the sentence with parentheticals, but, on the other hand, I would think the benefits outweigh that. — al-Shimoni (talk) 07:56, 22 January 2011 (UTC)

The reason this thought first came to my mind was that when I first read it, I read the "or" as part of the word, and it took half a second to reassess what I read (I tend to write personal notes for my own reading in Greek, paleo-Hebrew, Hebrew, and English, and others somewhat interchangeably — not exactly code-switching, but something like it that's harder to explain but easier to understand — so that may have been a side effect of my habits). — al-Shimoni (talk) 08:05, 22 January 2011 (UTC)

Over a year, and no responses, so I made an edit to make it more readable. — al-Shimoni (talk) 19:09, 10 June 2012 (UTC)

Let's do a IPA pronunciation beside the theoretical original pronunciation. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 108.170.134.171 (talk) 03:33, 24 January 2014 (UTC)

Servator mundi or Salvator mundi?

This article says that St. Jerome interprets the name as "Servator mundi", but there's no source cited. I believe this may be in error; all the sources I've come across have "Salvator mundi", not "Servator mundi". e.g. The Vulgate has "Salvatorem mundi" (here: http://drbo.org/x/d?b=drl&bk=1&ch=41&l=45-#x ) And St. Jerome's Quæstiones hebraicæ in Genesim has "Saluator mundi" (page 61, line 7, here: https://archive.org/stream/hieronymiquaest00lagagoog#page/n72/mode/2up ). I am not familiar with his works so I don't know whether he used "Servator" elsewhere (I take it the two words are basically synonyms?), but "Salvator" seems to be far more common. 98.115.171.238 (talk) 01:43, 15 June 2018 (UTC)

My reaction was the same, but while 'servator mundi' is attested from the margin of an old MS. in Oxford it seems it's only a minority reading. I'll change it to 'salvator'; Jerome says "Licet Hebraice hoc nomen, absconditorum repertorem sonet, tamen quia ab Ægyptio ponitur, ipsius linguæ debet habere rationem. Interpretatur ergo sermone Ægyptio Saphanet Phanee (צפנת פענח) sive ut Septuaginta transferre voluerunt, Psomthom-Phanech, Salvator mundi, eo quod orbem terrae ab imminente famis excidio liberavit." Jerome, Liber Hebraicarum Quaestionum in Genesim: on Genesis LXI:45. The 'servator' appears in the footnotes to the 'salvator mundi' phrase in Migne, J. P. (ed.) Sancti Eusebii Hieronymi Stridonensis presbyteri Opera omnia, Patrologia Latini vol. 23, Paris: 1845, pp. 998. GPinkerton (talk) 03:36, 28 June 2018 (UTC)

Saphnath Paneah

I recently said Saphnath Paneah translated from Hebrew in Google translate meant A beggar had deciphered and then cited it . Then rebelliously it was taken down. I am infuriated by that and now I wish for him to be banned from editing this article. Logawinner (talk) 17:05, 14 June 2019 (UTC)

@Logawinner: hho is "him"? Me? User:Imeriki al-Shimoni? I see I've warned you about adding personal commentary to articles. One of your edits was "Oh yes there is English to Hebrew He deciphered deciphering(don't take it out till you try it in Google translate but do take these parenthesis out)" How could that possibly belong in an article in an encyclopedia? Inany case my second warning pointed you to WP:VERIFY which you continue to violate, as well as no original research which you also must read. I see that User:Largoplazo has also warned y7ou. If you insist you are right and our policies are wrong and want one of us sanctioned, go to WP:ANI. Doug Weller talk 18:51, 14 June 2019 (UTC)

No not that, afterwords I put Just a beggar had deciphered Different and cited it refer to the Citation in the boxed article Logawinner (talk • contribs) 19:53, 14 June 2019 (UTC)

That's not a citation, you need an academic source. Doug Weller talk 20:47, 14 June 2019 (UTC)

Google Translate is far from reliable, especially when you pretend that an Egyptian phrase is Hebrew. Largoplazo (talk) 22:23, 14 June 2019 (UTC)

Another editor found this much more reliable source that you could act add https://www.blueletterbible.org/search/Dictionary/viewTopic.cfm?topic=IT0009307 Logawinner (talk) 23:23, 18 June 2019 (UTC)

Now I suggest Jacob was Pharoahs "Secret Intrepreter" but, Im not saying that's absolutely true, that's just what I researched. If this can be confirmed by another 2 users great to ahead, but otherwise it will only be an attempt to confirm. Logawinner (talk) 01:59, 2 November 2019 (UTC)

If it can't be discerned from the Bible, then it's made up (even in the context of a presumption of the truth of the Bible itself) no matter how many people argue it to be true, as the Bible is the only putative primary source of information about him. Largoplazo (talk) 02:33, 2 November 2019 (UTC)

User:Logawinner's source is sthe International Standard Bible Encyclopaedia and I'd argue that is not a reliable source. Note that Apophis is actually the Greek name of Apepi, and our article on him says nothing about Joseph. Doug Weller talk 11:43, 2 November 2019 (UTC)

Ok I will ask a translator. Logawinner (talk) 17:58, 2 November 2019 (UTC)

Don't bother, except for your own personal enlightenment. "I asked a translator and they said this" is not a reliable source. Ian.thomson (talk) 04:55, 4 November 2019 (UTC)

References

Hieroglyphics

*(ḏd n f jpj-ꜥnḫ) "[he] who is called Ipiankhu" in hieroglyphs

*(ḏfꜣw n ꜥt pꜣ-n-nꜥj-ꜣḫ) "overseer of the storehouse of abundance, he-of-the-excellent-Spirit" in hieroglyphs

I just added the hieroglyphics for Steindorff's interpretation (but I couldn't find the Steindorff article, so I took the hieroglyphs from Budge. They're probably the same though).

I also gathered some other hieroglphics--those of Rohl's interpretation and Clark's interpretation. But since neither of these interpretations are mentioned in the article, I wasn't sure if it would be appropriate to add the hieroglyphics. (Would probably just clutter the page) But I am pasting them here to this discussion page, in case somebody later wants to add them (or otherwise needs them for something). 2601:49:C301:D810:696E:1317:5AD1:3A8A (talk) 20:25, 24 November 2020 (UTC)

Creation Ministries International?

This does not seem to be the most reliable source for mainstream scholarly interpretations. If we are using sources that aren't applying neutral historical criticism, we should make that clear so we don't mislead the reader. For example, Patrick Clarke's argument is presented as a refutation of Steindorff, but it is not made clear to the reader that Clarke's argument does not represent mainstream historians and that it rather treats the biblical texts uncritically. Pythagimedes (talk) 04:11, 17 December 2021 (UTC)

Siptah - the semitic pharoah

Siptah was a semitic pharoah. His mother suti-LIJA, basically matches the name of Jacob's second wife Leah. Some of his alternate glyphs look pretty darn close to Zaphenath Paneah, or Siptah Mery n Ptah. Additionally, the tale of 2 brothers has been linked to the Joseph story. This tale was first written down during Seti 2; his son Siptah would have been alive then.

C102 (not C1)

C102 (not C1)

https://pharaoh.se/pharaoh/Siptah

Lastly, the timeline matches up; if David, archaeologically was around 1000BC. 10 Generations after him is Jeroboam II(760BC). So 10 generations is 240 years. Joseph is 10 generations before David (~1228BC). Siptah rules around 1200BC; this is spitting distance, or within the margin of error. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2601:581:C300:290:E4BD:64F0:6DA3:BC2D (talk) 03:24, 14 January 2022 (UTC)

Re: Saphnath Paneah

As a native Hebrew speaker (& a linguist), I should add that what the bible states as the name for Joseph & is presented as an "Egyptian" name sounds a bit of "a...stretch" because, the above-referenced name, albeit "altered" to look/sound different than Herbew, CLEARLY contains the 2 Hebrew words: Tso 'phen (the verb of which in the infinitive: le'hats' peen=לְהַצְפִּין-from the radical/root of: צ-פ-ן, which means: to conceal/hide as well as to go North-a root from which the word for: North is: tsa'phon=צָפֹן/צָפוֹן &, the word belonging to the radicals/root letters: פ-ע-נ-ח from which the infinitive verb: לְפַעְנֵחַ=le'pha'3a'ne'akh=to decipher/decode comes from). Hence, if we put the 2 together (assemble them), we'd clearly get the combination is: The Decipherer of Codes!

2600:1700:BEC0:4610:C95:CD3:8357:5B94 (talk) 07:42, 7 May 2022 (UTC)

Hebrew Root of Tzafenat Paneach

Anyone interested or want to add this? "According to Rabbi Bën Mähren Qadësh, verily, this title given to Yosef Ha'Tzadiq (Joseph the righteous), comes from the Hebrew language, being Tzafenat (צפנת) from the root Tzofen (צפן) meaning "he hid, concealed, treasured up " and Paneach (פַּעְנֵחַ) from the root "Pineach (פֻּעְנַח)" meaning "decoder." Tzafenat Paneach (צָפְנַת פַּעְנֵחַ) thus means "The decoder of the hidden" or "The decoder of the hidden code". Kabbalist sages refer to the set of Kabbalistic tools (ciphers) applied in decoding the secrets of the Torah ((gematria, temurot, tzeruf, Notarikon, etc)) as "Tzafenat Paneach." Mahrenqadesh (talk) 13:47, 2 September 2022 (UTC)

Amenhotep

Zaphnath-Paaneah = Paaneah-Zaphnath = Maan-h-tsap-nath = Amen-hotep-nath.

Just granpa (talk) 23:17, 20 September 2022 (UTC)