brain sizes: Einstein's and women's

Bob LeChevalier lojbab at
Sat Aug 24 16:25:49 EST 2002

"John Knight" <jwknight at> wrote:
>Note that "Jews" is Strong's # 3064 and "Judah" is Strong's #3063:
>Patronymic from H3063; a Jehudite (that is, Judaite or Jew), or descendant
>of Jehudah: - Jew.
>From H3034; celebrated; Jehudah (or Judah), the name of five Israelites;
>also of the tribe descended from the first, and of its territory: - Judah.
>Just because they sound similar, or appear to be similar in the English
>language, or are next to each other in the concordance, doesn't even begin
>to imply that they're one and the same.

Do you know what "patronymic" means, nincompoop?

It means that they are the same word, in a different form.  The
patronymic form H3064 means that H3063 was the father.

>If they were one and the same,
>there wouldn't have been two separate and distinct Hebrew words with two
>separate and distinct Strong's Numbers, right?

They aren't separate and distinct Hebrew words.  Learn some Hebrew
before you make more a fool of yourself than you already are.

There are also several Strong's numbers associated with the name of
the Lord.  Does this mean that the people of the Old testament
worshipped many different gods, all with closely similar names.  The
Lord (with capital letter) is translated in Strongs using H0113,
H0136, H3050, H3068, H3069, H3072, H3074.  Are these all different and
unrelated Hebrew gods because they use different Hebrew words because
they have different Strong's numbers?


More information about the Neur-sci mailing list