Words and Phrases

The Alpha and Omega The following excerpt (Appendix B, Item # 741) was taken from the “New Albany Notes on Revelation”.

“For an explanation of this phrase, please see the comments on Revelation Chapter 1 Verse 8. This appendix was added because a challenge to the thoughts presented necessitates a detailed explanation. The following explanation is a compilation of material gleaned from Hebrew references and discussions with two different rabbis.

“And I will pour on the house of David and on the inhabitants of Jerusalem the Spirit of grace and supplication; then they will look on me whom they pierced. Yes, they will mourn for Him as one mourns for his only son, and grieve for Him as one grieves for a firstborn.”

STRICTLY SPEAKING, the word “ME” in Zech. 12:10 is not spelled aleph tav (the first and last letters of the Hebrew alphabet and the equivalent of alpha and omega in Greek.)

The Hebrew word for “ME” IS, however, a FORM of the Hebrew particle, ETH, which is spelled aleph tav and which is the word in the Hebrew text immediately following “ME” and preceding “WHOM.”

This word IS NOT TRANSLATED INTO ENGLISH because it is a word of emphasis —a sign that the following noun or pronoun is of unusual importance. While it is NOT exactly like the Ho in Ho Theos (John 1:1), it is somewhat similar in function. It is for enforcement or emphasis. Some clues as to its usage can be found in Strong’s #853 (Hebrew Dictionary) and especially in Gesenius (Hebrew grammar) on pages 92 & 93. IT DOES HAVE OTHER CONFIRMED AND THEORETICAL USAGES.

(אֵ֣ת (’êṯ) Direct object marker Strong’s Hebrew 853: 1) sign of the definite direct object, not translated in English but generally preceding and indicating the accusative.)

The attempt to discredit the force of the Zech 12:10 connections to Rev 1:8 pass off this untranslated particle as MERELY a Hebrew punctuation device, a relatively unimportant grammatical marking. It IS, in a sense, a punctuation or grammar device; but we cannot say it is MERELY one.

Regardless of language scholars’ various arguments, (and they, significantly, do not seem of one mind in this matter), it is GOD who wrote the text and who had INTENT in every “jot and tittle.” The participle, ETH, is an inherent and inseparable part of the holy text. Rather than being ignorable, IT is the very item, the very inseparable part of the phrase,

“…Me (eth) whom… “, which makes BOTH the ME and the WHOM the code for Alpha & Omega (or, in this case, for Aleph-Tav) WITHOUT this particle, “ME” does NOT have this significance —although it might be argued that it does since it is a FORM of ETH.

Discounting this particle and passing it off as MERELY a Hebrew writing device is as deplorable as ignoring the THE (HO) in THE GOD (HO THEOS) —perhaps worse!

It is most significant that Hebrew scholars differ on the meanings and usages of ETH —sometimes with vehemence! The word itself, usually untranslated and usually thought untranslatable, has its usage origins lost somewhere in antiquity, thus accounting for the uncertainty of its real meaning and possibilities. Obviously, if the experts cannot agree, WE cannot solve the problems of its functions in Hebrew. But that is not our purpose. Experts also argue about the definite article (Ho) in John 1:1; we, on the other hand, KNOW what the verse means. It doesn’t always take an expert!

The fact that possibilities exist in some Hebrew minds concerning this word which don’t exist in other Hebrew minds, allows us to speculate as to what GOD intends for us to learn from it. The thought expressed by one rabbi is excellent:

The fact that we do not know a function does not mean that it does not exist. The fact that the word exists proves that it has a function. It is SAFE TO CONCLUDE that God did not construct the Hebrew text for Jewish comprehension (yet) but FOR OURS! (1 Pet. 1:12).

“To them it was revealed that, not to themselves, but to us they were ministering the things which now have been reported to you through those who have preached the gospel to you by the Holy Spirit sent from heaven—things which angels desire to look into.”

“And I will pour on the house of David and on the inhabitants of Jerusalem the Spirit of grace and supplication; then they will look on me whom they pierced. Yes, they will mourn for Him as one mourns for his only son, and grieve for Him as one grieves for a firstborn.” (Zech 12:10)

A very literal rendering of the text if we translate “ETH” into its Greek alphabetical equivalent would be:

“They shall look upon ME, Alpha-Omega, WHOM they have pierced.”

Is it possible to be more explicit? Is it possible to deny the connection of this idea to Rev. 1:7, 8?

 Of course it IS possible. One rabbi feels confident that Zechariah teaches that the Gentiles are the pierced ones! —and he does so based on the usage of ETH which he prefers. But his prophecy is NOT (now) for the Jews to understand. Nor can we reason with rabbis on New Testament antitypes!

It should be noted that ETH is used in the first verse of the Bible. It appears (untranslated) in the middle of the sentence. “In the beginning God (eth) created the heavens and the earth.” To show the futility of pursuing this with a rabbi, it is interesting to note that one Rabbi suggested that the ETH in this sentence is to show that God created the heavens and the earth rather than that the heavens and the earth created God! (Do we really think someone would have made that mistaken conclusion?)

Another explanation, based on the SYMBOL of the first (aleph) and last (tav), is found in Adam Clark’s notes on Genesis 1:1. There it is suggested that ETH symbolizes SUBSTANCE —the beginning and ending, the essence or totality of everything. Thus the translation would read “God created the substance of the heavens and the substance of the earth.” This is a nice thought, although the rabbi cited above did not think so! Apparently it is speculative and/or awkward to translate or explain ETH. But it seems definitely irresponsible to IGNORE it when a CLOSE STUDY is being made of a passage. After all, it IS God’s Word. It is a sign of special emphasis; it is a stop sign in a sense. It frequently seems to say, “Reconsider this; it has a special significance.”

Indeed, in Gen 1:1, it is not beyond reason to suspect that God (Elohim) is INITIALLY drawing attention to the fact that HE IS the ALPHA and the OMEGA —a claim which He specifically makes in Isa 44:6.

“Thus says the Lord, the King of Israel, and his Redeemer, the Lord of hosts: ‘I am the First and I am the Last; Besides Me there is no God.”

Thus Gen 1:1 COULD very aptly read: “In the beginning, God, Alpha & Omega, created…” Christian students of Scripture should like that thought although Trinitarians would, no doubt, spoil the meaning!

The particle, ETH, according to Strong’s (#852), means SIGN in Chaldean. Gesenius confirms this same meaning in Hebrew also. Is it not likely that this emphasis particle IS, indeed, a SIGN to us?

The hard facts of Zech. 12:10 are these:

1) The Lord put a change of pronoun from ME to HIM in the sentence for SOME REASON viz. “…they will look on ME whom they have pierced; and they will mourn for HIM…” It certainly draws our attention because of the awkwardness of the passage!

2) The Lord then placed ETH (aleph-tav or alpha-omega) immediately after the word “ME” (the awkward pronoun) further yet to emphasize it in connection with “WHOM.”

3) It just so happens that ETH is spelled with the two letters (אֵ֣ת: ’êṯ), which, in themselves, are a CODE for FIRST and LAST. It just so happens, additionally, that “ME” is a FORM of ETH.

Coincidence in Scripture is rarely (if ever) coincidence!

4) The Revelator quotes this text (viz. Zech 12:10) JUST BEFORE someone CLAIMS to be the Alpha & Omega, another coincidence?

We think not. It seems very poor Bible study to suggest that it might be a coincidence. It was NOT Zechariah which drew our attention to this item (except by its strange grammar.) It was Revelation. NO OTHER known explanation accounts for the out-of-place interruption of Rev. 1:8. This explanation not only accounts for it, but enhances it.