Naga


Got this today from Ruddy. Have a read. Gets you thinking?

Question Regarding an Important Biblical Definition

“I recently discovered that the definition of the word in Genesis 3.3 usually translated “touch” has been altered in all the Strong’s Lexicons I can find online. They delete the fact that Strong’s says that it is a euphemism for sex, which shows that Eve did have sex with the Devil. This is especially true for Bibles where they list Strong’s for looking up purposes. Did you know about this? Do you still have a Strong’s with the original definition for the word, “naga,” which is Hebrew 5060? The word doesn’t look like 5060 in the Hebrew? Is there a mistake? Are there any other lexicons that point out the usage as a euphemism? Roy, Perth”

Answer

Yes, we’ve known about that for quite a while. Obviously somebody doesn’t want folks to know of the usage of the word as a euphemism. Certainly it’s a cover up carried out on purpose, because someone has deleted it in every one we’ve looked at.

No, there is no mistake. Words change in their usage in Hebrew and Greek. “Naga” is the core word. The word as it’s used in that verse would be transliterated something like this as a Qal Imperfect, “tiggahu,” which is a different form of the word, “naga.” As I’m sure you recall, Hebrew and Greek words are often dynamic, and thus carry many meanings. This is true in most languages, but it is moreso in languages like Hebrew and Greek where there aren’t many words in those languages. The fewer the words, the more figurative the language, as a general rule.

Here is the original definition, as listed in Strong’s.

Strong’s Hebrew 5060

Transliteration: nâga‛

Pronounciacion: naw-gah’

A primitive root; properly to touch, that is, lay the hand upon (for any purpose; euphemistically, to lie with a woman); by implication to reach (figuratively to arrive, acquire); violently, to strike (punish, defeat, destroy, etc.)

I do have some old lexicons and some studies by various Hebraists who point out the euphemism. But it’s better to work the meaning out for ourselves, as I’ve done in several studies over the years. This is a classic manner of determining meaning in Hebrew, which we simply call, “Usage,” as I’ve done below.

The Verses Where the Euphemism is Used by Eve When She was Speaking with Satan

Genesis 3.1-3

1. Now the Serpent was much wiser than any of the human-beings in the field that the Ever-Living Creator had made.

2. And the Serpent asked the woman: “Is it true that the Creator has said, ‘You shall not eat from any tree in the garden?’”

3. And the woman answered the serpent: “We can eat from the fruit of the trees in the garden, but from the fruit coming from

the tree that is in the middle of the garden (the Tree that produces Knowledge That is both Good and Evil), the Creator has said: `You must not eat from it, and you must not *touch it, or perhaps you will die.’”

The All-Important Euphemism for Sex in Genesis Three

*touch it (Genesis 3.3): The word “touch” is the key word in this verse to understanding what Eve meant, and the key to understanding what actually happened in the Garden. The phrase “to touch” is a Hebrew euphemism for having sex. A euphemism is when we use a more pleasing, more polite, or more accepted expression in the place of a less pleasing, less polite, less accepted one. They are plentiful in our language today, especially when it comes to sex; and our people have not changed—they were plentiful when our ancestors spoke Hebrew.

(Of course, you might make a side study here to see that the Lord did not say for Eve “not to touch” the Tree, which is figuratively Satan himself. So, from that fact we can infer that Satan at least implied the act when he was talking to Eve. She at first rejected his advances, but he charmed her with his tongue and his looks, the latter of which his offspring do not have, but the former they certainly do. You cannot argue with them. We can only strive to be “as shrewd as the Serpents. (Matthew 10.16)”

Some common euphemisms we use today for having sex are as follows: “She went to bed with him.” Or, “He slept with her.” Or, “He bedded her.” Or, “They had an affair.” We also use the figure quite often for defecating and urinating by saying such things as, “I excused myself.” Women are famous for saying (before this more coarse world we live in today), “I need to powder my nose.” “I need to use the powder room.” All are classic euphemisms. And we indeed still use the word “touch” as a euphemism for sex in such statements as, “Don’t touch her.” Or, when the stern father says, “He better not touch my daughter.” Or, from one accused for having had sex with someone, “I never touched her.”

In the following verses we have three perfect examples of the word “naga” (translated “touch”) used in the Scriptures as a euphemism for sex. In Genesis 20.6 & Ruth 2.9 & Proverbs 6.29:

Three Examples of the Hebrew Word for “Touch” in the Scriptures Used as a Euphemism For Sex

1st Example of the Euphemism “to Touch” Used for Sex

Genesis 20.6:

6. And the Creator spoke to Abimelech in a dream: “Yes, I know that you did this act with an honorable heart, and I certainly kept you from sinning against Me. For this reason I did not allow you to *touch her.”

*touch her (Genesis 20.6): The “her” in this verse is of course Abraham’s beautiful Adamic wife Sarah. Khrist says that He kept Abimelech from having sex with her because He knew Abimelech had good intentions when he took her (Gen. 20.2). The penalty would have been death if he had mated with her (Gen. 20.3), because it was the Lord’s plan that Sarah would continue the pure Adamic seed-line (from Seth to Khrist) through which He would bring His people Yasreal and Himself as Yasu our Savior.

No one outside of certain, chosen Adamic people could mix with that seed-line and live, and they didn’t. In Genesis 38.9-10, the Lord Himself killed the patriarch Judah’s son Onan, who was from a racially-mixed mating with a Kananite, for having sex with Tamar, another woman in Khrist’s genetic line. Earlier God killed Judah’s oldest son because he was genetically evil (Genesis 38.7). Judah had married out of the Adamic seed-line by mating with a Kananite woman; according to wall etchings and other drawings, we know that the Kananites were a racially-mixed people, part Mongoloid and part Adamic. (Zachariah 14.21 provides us with a comment whereby the Lord promises when He returns there will be no more Kananites among the true House born from Yasreal, for it is an abomination that they are ruling over His people, His nation, and His priesthood. He will thus cleanse them from His people when He returns.)

2nd Example of the Euphemism “to Touch” Used for Sex

Ruth 2.9: Boaz to Ruth

9. Watch the field where the men are harvesting, and follow along after the other girls. I have ordered the men not to *touch you.

*touch you (Ruth 2.9): Again here, the subject is sexual intercourse and the protection of the chosen seed-line. Boaz knew that he was to birth a son that would be in the seed-line of Khrist and that Ruth would be part of that line. Boaz eventually married Ruth and produced Obed, the father of Jesse, the father of David, the father of Nathan—the great list of ancestors in Khrist’s seed-line. And so, the seed-line remained genetically pure on down to Khrist.

3rd Example of the Euphemism “to Touch” Used for Sex

Proverbs 6.27 & 29

27. Can a man pour fire in his lap without his clothes being burned?

29. Thus it is with a man who *goes in to his fellow-kindred’s wife: no man who *touches her shall go unpunished.

*goes in to his fellow-kindred’s wife (Proverbs 6.27 & 29): This is the best of the verses as an example, because here the Scriptures use another euphemism for sex: “go in to,” showing how common euphemisms were then, as they are today.

*touches her (Proverbs 6.27 & 29): The idea expressed in the above two verses is that anyone playing with fire gets burned, and so it is with anyone who commits adultery by having sex with another man’s wife, for which the penalty is death. (Leviticus 20.10)

Hope this helps: Ruddy Adam


Dear Ruddy, I’ve asked my Fotomann to dig a bit after Strong’s Hebrew 5060 at his BibleHUB, which he did and found it as you put it. Here’s a screen shot with the selection on it. Kisses to you!! xoxo


Photo by Charles 🇵🇭 on Unsplash

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.