If someone were to learn Hebrew would they be able to read early Biblical manuscripts?

(I don't know about Greek.)

Native "Modern" Hebrew speakers in Israel (e.g., kids in elementary school, or even in kindergarten) simply open the Bible and read and understand it (with the exception of some words not in common use (the "vocabulary" issue), but that's true for English as well).

They don't know it's not "Modern" Hebrew. In fact, most of them haven't heard of the term "Modern Hebrew". It was only when I got on the Internet, in my 20s, that I "discovered" that the Hebrew I talk, "Modern", is supposedly a different language from the "Biblical" one. For us native speakers, the Bible is a text with a very different *style* than the one we talk in our daily life, but not a different *language*.

A non-native learner of Hebrew, however, may have a different experience: He may not have the opportunity to immerse himself in Hebrew, and therefore may not develop the *intuition* for the language. It's not unlikely that reading "Biblical" Hebrew would be very tough for him if he was learning the "Modern" one. I've never talked with such non-native learners so I can't tell you for sure.

So I'd suggest to a foreigner to take the shortcut of learning just "Biblical" Hebrew (it might actually not be a "shortcut": Biblical Hebrew has structures that, while generally can be safely ignored or skimmed over, your textbook will tediously discuss).

==

(@WwwdotBibleSelectordotcom: Your "Biblical Hebrew did not have ANY vowels!" ejaculation isn't correct. There isn't a language without vowels. You wanted to say that the Hebrew *script* didn't have a (complete) notation for vowels back then. The notation that was developed since then hasn't changed anything in the language: it's just an optional graphical aid for the reader.)

There is a *lot* more to it than that.

Although some people today speak modern Hebrew or Greek, these languages are significantly different from the Hebrew and Greek that were used to write the Bible.

Most Greek-speaking people today find it a challenge to understand Biblical Greek correctly, because new words have been added to the language, replacing older terms, and many words that have survived have different meanings.

For example, the word rendered “beautiful” at Acts 7:20 and Hebrews 11:23 means “funny” in modern Greek. Additionally, there have been extensive changes in the grammar and syntax of the language. It is similar concerning the ancient Hebrew language.

although some people today speak modern Hebrew or Greek, these languages are significantly different p. 21from the Hebrew and Greek that were used to write the Bible. Most Greek-speaking people today find it a challenge to understand Biblical Greek correctly. This is because new words have been added to the language, replacing older terms, and many words that have survived have different meanings. For example, the word rendered “beautiful” at Acts 7:20 and Hebrews 11:23 means “funny” in modern Greek. Additionally, there have been extensive changes in the grammar and syntax of the language.

Even if you were to learn modern Hebrew or modern Greek, it would not necessarily mean that you would understand the Bible more accurately in its original languages. You would still need to rely on dictionaries and grammar books to show you how these languages were used when the books of the Bible were first put into written form.

Learning a new language can be a very difficult task. Although it may at first be relatively easy to learn a few phrases in another language, it may take *years of constant effort* before you will be able to understand the subtle nuances of that language.

Fortunately, Interlinear Bibles have been published, like:

"The Kingdom Interlinear Translation of the Greek Scriptures,"

available on this app:

"JW Library" {see #3)

http://www.jw.org/en/online-help/jw-library/

I also suggest reading this article, along the same lines as your question:

Just to point out one significant difference between modern Hebrew and Biblical Hebrew:

Biblical Hebrew did not have ANY vowels!

Imagine!

Clearly, the language has changed *significantly*. Clearly, only someone who is an expert in Biblical Hebrew can get a *complete and accurate* understanding of that language. The rest of us have to rely on translations into a modern language - even if that modern language is modern Hebrew.

Similarly enormous changes have also occurred with regard to the other Biblical languages - Koine Greek (several differences) compared to modern Greek, and Biblical Aramaic (also no vowels) compared to modern Aramaic.

Realize the modern, scholarly translations of the Bible are the work of entire *teams*, each team made up of accredited experts in the field of the particular ancient language in question. So: to get an understanding of the Biblical documents in the original languages that is as accurate and precise as your understanding of a scholarly translation in your native language, you would have to be an *expert* in all 3 ancient Biblical languages.

Most people have neither the desire, nor the funds, nor the intellectual proclivity to acquire such expertise.

P.S. You can confirm my statements if you research from *reliable* sources on the internet or your local library (if it is sufficiently large). Please don't believe the answers which criticize my statements based on *ignorance* of the topic under discussion! One term you might want to look up is "pure abjad" - meaning a written language with no vowel indicators. Biblical Hebrew (unlike both modern and Masoretic Hebrew) is a "pure abjad". Vowel markings *simply did not exist* when Biblical Hebrew was in use (and that is also true of several other languages - not only of Biblical Hebrew). Note also that **Tanakh is not available in anything remotely resembling complete form in Biblical Hebrew and Aramaic** The oldest *complete* Tanakh available is written in Masoretic Hebrew and is only about 1,000 years old and certainly *does* include vowel markings. Biblical Hebrew **does not** include vowel markings.

(Answer to the question + reply to other answers:)

As Merc said, any native speaker of "modern" Hebrew can easily understand the Tanakh (that's what you call "Old testament").

True, there are some MINOR differences between "modern" and "biblical" Hebrew, but it's like if you're American you understand British even though it's slightly different.

Now, all the other answers (especially Bible Selector) say that's "Biblical" Hebrew is very different from "modern" Hebrew. Well, that's a nice theory, but REALITY says otherwise. There are 2 native speakers here (Merc and me) telling you that even kids in Israel understand the language of the Tanakh in its original form. I remember myself reading Genesis at the age of 7 without any problem. And for your information, Bible Selector, the Tanakh books that we have are also without vowels... and we understand them all right. It's true that normal Tanakh books have little markings for aid, but guess what? when I was 11.5 I read the Sefer Torah (it's the five first books of the Tanakh in their most original form, without any marking or punctuation and of course without vowels) and I understood it all right. Since then, I've read the Sefer Torah literally hundreds of times, and I never thought it's a "different language" until I saw it on the internet (like Merc said).

You can argue if you want, but it won't change the facts...

But because I see you're very upset about the vowels thing, I'll explain this below (in the end of this answer).

Anyway, since the asker is not a native speaker, I'd recommend you to to learn the basic grammar (structure of sentence etc.) for today's Hebrew, but when it comes to vocabulary, you should focus on "biblical" Hebrew, because I think it's a little easier to learn. I read in YNET Encyclopedia (here: http://www.ynet.co.il/articles/0,7340,L-3579212,00... ) that there's only about 8000 different Hebrew words in the Tanakh compared to about 120,000 in today's Hebrew. This is because the Tanakh talks about certain topics only, and also because there's many new nouns that didn't exist in the time of the Tanakh like plane, microwave, computer and all these modern words.

So if you only want to understand the Tanakh, you shouldn't bother yourself with today's nouns...

Now I'll reply to the other answers:

@Horsense

You said "there have been extensive changes in the grammar and syntax of the language". That might be the case for Greek (idk), but it's not true for Hebrew. For the most cases, the grammatical rules of the Tanakh is considered binding rules in today's Hebrew grammar. You're also right that some words change their meaning during the years, but there's only few cases of this in Hebrew, and usually you can tell by the context.

@Lou G said "the Hebrew language as spoken today has nothing in common with biblical Hebrew."

@Brad said "They are similar, but with many significant differences to the Hebrew spoken today."

well, I love how you two just state your opinion without any real argument or proof. What are your sources?

@BibleSelector

First of all, I agree with you that if all the asker wants is to learn the Bible, then they should just read the translation to their native language. But that wasn't the question!

If you look closely they said "If someone were to learn Hebrew would they be able to read early Biblical manuscripts?" And obviously, the only people who can answer that are people who:

1)Speak "modern" Hebrew

2)Tried to read the Bible in its original version.

You don't speak "modern" Hebrew and didn't read the Bible in Hebrew, so what do you know? It's okay to say that based on what you know about the differences between "biblical" and "modern" Hebrew we won't be able to understand it, but when 2 native speakers tell you that they do understand it for a fact, you're not supposed to call them "ignorant and arrogant" in the comments and claim you know better.

As to what you said about scholars - you're not a scholar of the English language, so you "can't get a *complete and accurate* understanding of that language" as scholars do, but that doesn't stop you from reading the bible in English, does it?

Now to the vowels thing:

First, it's not true that "Biblical Hebrew did not have ANY vowels". Sometimes there are vowels in the Tanakh. For example in Genesis chapter 1, verse 2 the word for "deep" has 1 vowel, and also the word for "And the Spirit".

Also, in today's Hebrew many vowels don't exist. For example, if I were to write the sound "banker" in today's Hebrew it'd be like "bnkr" (it's not a word in Hebrew, but I just give you an example you can understand).

So, it's true that the Hebrew of the Tanakh contains much less vowels than today's Hebrew, but the difference between them is not as big as you think. And because we're used to write without some vowels, we can easily understand a text even if it's without any vowels at all. And again, this is not a theory, but a fact: I speak Hebrew and I understand the Tanakh in its original form.

==========================================================

Edit: (reply to BibleSelector's P.S. and his comments on Merc's answer)

1) You wrote: "You obviously don't know that the Masoretes introduced vowels into Hebrew writing".

This is a wrong statement. Masoretes invented the vowel markings called niqqud, but they didn’t invent the vowels – the use of vowel letters (“Mater lectionis”) was WAY before the Masoretes. If you don’t believe me, you can see this link

http://dss.collections.imj.org.il/isaiah

It’s a digital copy of the oldest version of Isaiah (incomplete and inaccurate) from 125 BCE, and guess what? It contains vowel letters! So your claim that Masoretes (who lived between the 5th and 10th centuries CE) invented vowels is obviously false.

2) What you wrote about “pure abjad” refers to Paleo-Hebrew alphabet which was in use in the 10th century BCE and before. But later on (way before the time of your Jesus), they replaced this alphabet with the current Hebrew alphabet (that doesn’t mean the language has changed, they just replaced the letters), and the Tanakh was exactly as it is today.

3) Did you know that your “Old testament” in English was translated from the Hebrew Tanakh that we have today? If you think that “Tanakh is not available in anything remotely resembling complete form in Biblical Hebrew” then all your bible books in any language are not accurate as well.

4) All this discussion about the vowels etc. IS COMPLETELY IRRELEVANT.

The asker refers to “the most original version we have” and they asked if Hebrew speakers would be able to understand it. The answer is yes. End of discussion.

Finally, some advice from King Solomon: “Even fools are thought wise if they keep silent" (proverbs 17:28, NKJV).

(If you didn’t get it, it’s a hint for you. You shouldn’t talk about things you know nothing about.)

Yes you should be able to actually look at Jewish text and discover they are very different from christian ones.

Yes and No, the Hebrew language as spoken today ahs noyhing in common with biblic Hebrew. If you learn Biblic Hebrew, you need to learn it's symbolism and numeric values, and the language of branches of Kabbalah, what is the way this text is coded. 1/3 of the Bible is in clear text, and to speak it is a mystery, since the glyphs you see are vowels only. For example, the firs letter Aleph is spoken as a breath, no sound, just breathe in or out, the symbol is Air, and the real life symbol is an OX. With that you have 2 symbols, it's numeric position is 0, it's numeric value is 1, and here you have a duality of possibilities.

So, do not really intend to "read" the Bible and it's sense just by learning Hebrew.

Earliest texts were written in Hebrew, Aramaic, and Greek. Also some latin and Arabic. Yes, arabic.

Learning Hebrew would certainly help, but it won't be like learning spanish and reading nutrition facts in spanish. Three (possibly more) versions of the Hebrew language were used in writing of the old testament. They are similar, but with many significant differences to the Hebrew spoken today.