logo
Welcome Guest! To enable all features please Login or Register.

Notification

Icon
Error

2 Pages12>
Options
View
Go to last post Go to first unread
Offline JamesH  
#1 Posted : Friday, October 19, 2012 5:44:11 AM(UTC)
JamesH
Joined: 1/8/2008(UTC)
Posts: 356
Location: Fresno, CA

Was thanked: 3 time(s) in 2 post(s)
Their have been many "Messiahs" in Yah's writings

The one I find most interesting is, King Cyrus

Cyrus was the pagan king of Persia

Isaiah 45 : 1
"Thus says YHWH to His "Messiah"
To Cyrus, whose right hand I have held—
To subdue nations before him
And loose the armor of kings,
To open before him the double doors,
So that the gates will not be shut:
Offline Steve in PA  
#2 Posted : Friday, October 19, 2012 6:13:38 AM(UTC)
Steve in PA
Joined: 3/31/2010(UTC)
Posts: 157
Location: PA

Was thanked: 4 time(s) in 3 post(s)
Many can and have done the "work of Yah", which is what Ma'aseyah means. There is still only ONE Yah... and He did His own work as "The Ma'aseyah" (title) Yahowsha' (also a title/name) as it is Yahowah who saves.
Offline Steve in PA  
#3 Posted : Friday, October 19, 2012 6:27:22 AM(UTC)
Steve in PA
Joined: 3/31/2010(UTC)
Posts: 157
Location: PA

Was thanked: 4 time(s) in 3 post(s)


4641. מַעֲשֵׂיָה Maaseyah or
מַעֲשֵׂיָהוּ Maaseyahu (796b); from 4639 and 3050; “work of Yah,” the name of a number of Isr.:—Maaseiah(23).


Thomas, R. L. (1998). New American Standard Hebrew-Aramaic and Greek dictionaries : Updated edition. Anaheim: Foundation Publications, Inc.
Offline JamesH  
#4 Posted : Friday, October 19, 2012 7:59:54 AM(UTC)
JamesH
Joined: 1/8/2008(UTC)
Posts: 356
Location: Fresno, CA

Was thanked: 3 time(s) in 2 post(s)
eh steve wrote:
There is still only ONE Yah... and He did His own work as "The Ma'aseyah"



ehsteve  hi

How did YHWH become the Messiah?

What was the process? 
Offline Steve in PA  
#5 Posted : Friday, October 19, 2012 8:19:20 AM(UTC)
Steve in PA
Joined: 3/31/2010(UTC)
Posts: 157
Location: PA

Was thanked: 4 time(s) in 3 post(s)
Yshayah'el

Look it up JimmyH
Offline JamesH  
#6 Posted : Friday, October 19, 2012 9:09:47 AM(UTC)
JamesH
Joined: 1/8/2008(UTC)
Posts: 356
Location: Fresno, CA

Was thanked: 3 time(s) in 2 post(s)
eh steve wrote:
Yshayah'el

Look it up JimmyH



Thanks eh steve 

How did  "God existing as man" become the Messiah ?

And what was the process to become the Messiah?
Offline MadDog  
#7 Posted : Friday, October 19, 2012 9:15:30 AM(UTC)
MadDog
Joined: 6/19/2009(UTC)
Posts: 157
Man
Location: San Antonio, Texas

JamesH wrote:
Thanks eh steve 

How did  "God existing as man" become the Messiah ?

And what was the process to become the Messiah?


Just say what's on your mind JamesH.

Stop trying to be some kind of cosmic guru which only you have the answers to
and trying to lead the poor unwashed masses to the light.

If you are saying that there was no Yahoshua or just one of many, then we have
deeply parted ways on what YY stands for.

You've gone a different path then the rest of us.
Offline JamesH  
#8 Posted : Friday, October 19, 2012 11:45:07 AM(UTC)
JamesH
Joined: 1/8/2008(UTC)
Posts: 356
Location: Fresno, CA

Was thanked: 3 time(s) in 2 post(s)
I think at one time YY believed Paul was a pretty good guy 

That changed

All I have done is post Yah's instructions.

I thought YY was for open minded people to discuss and debate Yah's Word?

I guess you guys don't like the subject?   
Offline MadDog  
#9 Posted : Friday, October 19, 2012 12:38:58 PM(UTC)
MadDog
Joined: 6/19/2009(UTC)
Posts: 157
Man
Location: San Antonio, Texas

JamesH wrote:
I think at one time YY believed Paul was a pretty good guy 

That changed

All I have done is post Yah's instructions.

I thought YY was for open minded people to discuss and debate Yah's Word?

I guess you guys don't like the subject?   


So you haven't read Questioning Paul.

Paul is a False Prophet. Where have you been?

Yah is not open minded, so I don't see any reason why I should be.

Your subject by suggesting there is no Yahoshua is completely
different from this forum

You have not just posted Yah's instructions, you've posted writings other
than the Torah, Prophets, and Psalms.

You've asked leading questions based on those "other writings" in a manner
to mislead people here unto some other path.

Most here already accept most of the New Testament is false, especially Paul,
but you've taken it to a whole new level.
Offline JamesH  
#10 Posted : Saturday, October 20, 2012 6:37:17 AM(UTC)
JamesH
Joined: 1/8/2008(UTC)
Posts: 356
Location: Fresno, CA

Was thanked: 3 time(s) in 2 post(s)
Maddog,

I see that your ability to read and understand is flawed

Or maybe you don't know that when the forum first started, Paul was considered true and an apostle but with research of Yah's word Paul was proven WRONG 

When I first posted my question it was just a hypothesis about the nt

But you did a pretty bad job of protecting your beloved jesus or what ever name you call him by 

Yahowsha is found in the Torah not the sun god worship Baal infested  nt of Christian paganism 

Maddog
Can you tell me

 

How did  "God existing as man" become the Messiah ?

And what was the process to become the Messiah?
Offline Steve in PA  
#11 Posted : Saturday, October 20, 2012 7:14:50 AM(UTC)
Steve in PA
Joined: 3/31/2010(UTC)
Posts: 157
Location: PA

Was thanked: 4 time(s) in 3 post(s)
Hey JimmyH...
Are you just a "lone wolf" not affiliated with any congregation... just studying Towrah on your own ...???
Or... do you follow certain Rabbi's and walk in one form of Judaism or another... Karaite, Zohar/Kabbalah, any other faction ...???
Offline JamesH  
#12 Posted : Saturday, October 20, 2012 7:57:35 AM(UTC)
JamesH
Joined: 1/8/2008(UTC)
Posts: 356
Location: Fresno, CA

Was thanked: 3 time(s) in 2 post(s)
 eh steve

I guess you can't answer the question because you keep deflecting from it

How did  "God existing as man" become the Messiah ?

And what was the process to become the Messiah?
Offline dajstill  
#13 Posted : Saturday, October 20, 2012 8:03:20 AM(UTC)
dajstill
Joined: 11/23/2011(UTC)
Posts: 748
Location: Alabama

Was thanked: 4 time(s) in 4 post(s)
JamesH wrote:
eh steve

I guess you can't answer the question because you keep deflecting from it

How did  "God existing as man" become the Messiah ?

And what was the process to become the Messiah?



JamesH,

Your question doesn't seem to be that of inquiry, but in trying to prove people wrong.

I don't know that anyone can tell you how exactly Yahowah sets Himself apart to become Yahowsha'.

I personally don't have a problem with questions, I have many of my own. For instance, I take strong issue with all the "rules" of Free Will that had to be broken in order to ensure that Yahowsha' would go back to the line of Dowd. The mental gymnastics just can't be done in my head.

I guess what I am getting at is are you trying to prove others wrong or are you trying to get your questioned answer? Are you trying to evangelize and "wake people up" to a truth you believe that you have, or are your trying to have an intellectual debate? Because, it feels more like you are trying to proselytize your position rather than have an honest discussion on the proof behind Yahowah/Yahowsha'.

Why not just say, "I think this is all a fake and here is why?" rather than the leading questions.
Offline Steve in PA  
#14 Posted : Saturday, October 20, 2012 8:30:14 AM(UTC)
Steve in PA
Joined: 3/31/2010(UTC)
Posts: 157
Location: PA

Was thanked: 4 time(s) in 3 post(s)
eh steve wrote:
Hey JimmyH...
Are you just a "lone wolf" not affiliated with any congregation... just studying Towrah on your own ...???
Or... do you follow certain Rabbi's and walk in one form of Judaism or another... Karaite, Zohar/Kabbalah, any other faction ...???

Offline Steve in PA  
#15 Posted : Saturday, October 20, 2012 8:57:05 AM(UTC)
Steve in PA
Joined: 3/31/2010(UTC)
Posts: 157
Location: PA

Was thanked: 4 time(s) in 3 post(s)
Isaiah 9:6 "For unto us a child (yeled - young boy) is born (yalad - is given birth and brought forth), unto us a Son (ben) is given (nathan yatan - eternally bestowed, entrusted and granted, delivered up, allowed to pay, and assigned to be afflicted)... His name (shem) will be called out, recited and read aloud (qara’ - proclaimed and summoned): Wonderful (pele’ - marvelously performing, separate, powerful, and extraordinary; miraculous and astounding non-verbal sign or portent pertaining to one’s attitude) Counselor (ya’ats - advisor, consultant, one who speaks and urges), Almighty (gibor - mighty man; fromgabar, one who prevails and is great, confirming and giving strength) God (‘el), Eternal (‘ad - perpetual and continuous) Father (‘ab - head of family), Prince (sar - overseer and patron) of Redemption (shalowm - favor and salvation, the blessing of completeness, soundness, health, prosperity, tranquility, contentment, friendship, companionship, and relationship; from shalam, to pay recompense, to reward and to restore, to provide a means of return by redemption, restitution and making amends).
Offline cgb2  
#16 Posted : Saturday, October 20, 2012 9:38:12 AM(UTC)
cgb2
Joined: 5/14/2010(UTC)
Posts: 689
Location: Colorado

Thanks: 16 times
Was thanked: 24 time(s) in 18 post(s)
Why continue to waste any more time with JamesH? He's not on the same page....not even on the same planet.

His canon is poor english translations of the torah, and some later "saints" writings to discredit/deny Yahowsha. Probably clemantine homilies, etc indicting Paul, but makes giant leaps and broad brushes - throwing out the baby, the bath water, the tub, the foundation and the earth beneath. Difficult to tell because he's so vague and broad on what he calls "ha Baal". He's even slandered the Psalms. Probably anything that does not fit into his religion (Dan 9, Isa 53, messianic layers in the miqra, etc), is probably "ha Baal". So slimey the way he dodges pinning him down, ignoring any strong points to just ask yet one more vague stawman question. Doesn't have a clue how utterly out of touch and extremely offensive some of his assumptions about what others think are.

So out of touch with this forum, "but he's read his antequated printout of YY several times, and considers us brothers", but certainly not the recent update, nor introtogod.org, questioningpaul.com, nor would he study verify anything in them that might be a threat to his religion. If he orders his 5 tons of unhewn rock to build a altar in his backyard, I don't care to see pictures either.

This is getting to the point of "never argue with a fool, people might not know the difference" !!
Offline Steve in PA  
#17 Posted : Saturday, October 20, 2012 9:56:16 AM(UTC)
Steve in PA
Joined: 3/31/2010(UTC)
Posts: 157
Location: PA

Was thanked: 4 time(s) in 3 post(s)
I hear what you are saying Chuck and I've pretty much said what I needed/wanted to say and am just about done with all this... yet, I will say, I do not see this as foolishly arguing with some idiot on say the "Boston Commons"... it's more like this dude walked into our house and took a dump on the rug. Not cool at all... and all he wants to do is play 20 questions- mind games.
Offline JamesH  
#18 Posted : Saturday, October 20, 2012 10:04:09 AM(UTC)
JamesH
Joined: 1/8/2008(UTC)
Posts: 356
Location: Fresno, CA

Was thanked: 3 time(s) in 2 post(s)
Cgb2 and you to lord stevie

Thanks for putting a stop to YHWH WORD again, post# 1

Isaiah  45 : 1

Are you guys here anti Semitic and hate the Torah?

I have noticed that a lot of you are quite good students of the lord and paint wonderful brush strokes

Try reading the Torah 
Offline cgb2  
#19 Posted : Saturday, October 20, 2012 5:32:53 PM(UTC)
cgb2
Joined: 5/14/2010(UTC)
Posts: 689
Location: Colorado

Thanks: 16 times
Was thanked: 24 time(s) in 18 post(s)
JamesH wrote:
Cgb2 and you to lord stevie

Thanks for putting a stop to YHWH WORD again, post# 1

Isaiah  45 : 1

Are you guys here anti Semitic and hate the Torah?

I have noticed that a lot of you are quite good students of the lord and paint wonderful brush strokes

Try reading the Torah 


Screw you jerk! Your assinine assumptions really take the cake. You should really keep up, read and verify. Maybe see you in several months, agitator.

http://www.introtogod.org
http://www.yadayah.com
http://www.questioningpaul.com
Shattering Myths GCN
BTR yadayah radio.

I'll answer your strawman Isaiah 45:1. Although this verse isn't one of them, as evidenced in the DSS, the Massorettes often altered Mas'seyah (implement doing the work of Yah) to Mashiach (annointed). They didn't believe in the corporeal manifestation of YHWH in the material realm (set apart from YHWH - Yahowsha <Yah-saves>), so altered the text. So yes there where many "annointed", but some key verses actually used "implement doing the work of Yah" and were changed.

Yah thought so much of the Massoretes he turned the Gihon springs septic in 1033AD and sent the survivors packing their Jerusalem academy to Damascus. No doubt the water borne illness made the "adulterous womans belly and thigh rot".

Get a clue what this forum is about, or stop posting until you do.
Offline tagim  
#20 Posted : Saturday, October 20, 2012 5:36:28 PM(UTC)
tagim
Joined: 9/30/2010(UTC)
Posts: 218
Man
Location: westen new york

Thanks: 3 times
JamesH, I notice that you have been a member of yada yahweh since nearly five years. I have yet to read your earlier posts since when you signed on, but I rather doubt that whatever you wrote then would be as spirited (probably not a good word choice) of what you have been writing recently. And I am curious as to what you intended to do with the answers to all the questions you have asked, also, for the chaffed feelings occasioned in the interim.
Offline JamesH  
#21 Posted : Sunday, October 21, 2012 3:36:27 AM(UTC)
JamesH
Joined: 1/8/2008(UTC)
Posts: 356
Location: Fresno, CA

Was thanked: 3 time(s) in 2 post(s)
tagim wrote:
JamesH, I notice that you have been a member of yada yahweh since nearly five years. I have yet to read your earlier posts since when you signed on, but I rather doubt that whatever you wrote then would be as spirited (probably not a good word choice) of what you have been writing recently. And I am curious as to what you intended to do with the answers to all the questions you have asked, also, for the chaffed feelings occasioned in the interim.



Tagim

I did not start the name calling and I am quite upset about what YY has become

It all started with the Virgin birth process in Matthew 

The context of Isaiah 7:14 was not about a Virgin birth and when that lid came off everything in the nt came apart

So my hypothesis was no Virgin birth and was looking to YY to see why they believed in a virgin birth 

What I got was anger and attacks 

My conclusion is no virgin birth which  makes mathew untrue based on my study's and the lack of imput here

I have read everything YY has put on the site and I am thankful that YY taught me how to question things and not be fooled 

Maddog, eh Steve and cgb2 have been absolutely abusive.
I guess they didn't care for the subject and I realize it is a threatening subject but I was not expecting the kind of behavior I got from them. Although they are pretty good at running people off.

As for me I see no reason to stay around here any more

I'll keep studying Yah's Torah and keep it to the best of my ability 

JamesH
Offline cgb2  
#22 Posted : Sunday, October 21, 2012 4:57:11 AM(UTC)
cgb2
Joined: 5/14/2010(UTC)
Posts: 689
Location: Colorado

Thanks: 16 times
Was thanked: 24 time(s) in 18 post(s)
Offline dajstill  
#23 Posted : Monday, October 22, 2012 1:31:06 AM(UTC)
dajstill
Joined: 11/23/2011(UTC)
Posts: 748
Location: Alabama

Was thanked: 4 time(s) in 4 post(s)
JamesH,

I just don't understand your leap from "NT" is corrupt to "there was no Yahowsha'". That seems like a really, really big leap. Have you discounted the prophesies saying He would be coming at the time Yahowsha' is said to have arrived? We do know that people were looking for a Messiah at the time, we know this from Ram Bam's actions with his false Messiah that got many slaughtered in an ill fated war. So, have you thrown out those prophesies?

I am I an asking that you walk me through your conclusion. Because if there was no "Messiah" that came at the appointed time we have a really, really big problem.
Offline cgb2  
#24 Posted : Monday, October 22, 2012 2:58:05 AM(UTC)
cgb2
Joined: 5/14/2010(UTC)
Posts: 689
Location: Colorado

Thanks: 16 times
Was thanked: 24 time(s) in 18 post(s)
dajstill wrote:
JamesH,

I just don't understand your leap from "NT" is corrupt to "there was no Yahowsha'". That seems like a really, really big leap. Have you discounted the prophesies saying He would be coming at the time Yahowsha' is said to have arrived? We do know that people were looking for a Messiah at the time, we know this from Ram Bam's actions with his false Messiah that got many slaughtered in an ill fated war. So, have you thrown out those prophesies?

I am I an asking that you walk me through your conclusion. Because if there was no "Messiah" that came at the appointed time we have a really, really big problem.


Let him go Dajstill. As amply demonstrated in the Isa 7:14 thread linked above, no amount of evidence or reason can get through to him. He's found a rabbinical website convoluting the "maiden" vs "virgin" so like them will twist/ignore the whole council of the T/P/P to fit. We didn't even get into the immanuel - God with us part. Folks like this don't think and can't put 2 and 2 together. He admits the Great day of YHWH is all over in scripture. Picture this fulfillment as an example ;^)

Isa 30:27 See, the Name of יהוה is coming from afar, burning with His wrath, and heavy smoke. His lips shall be filled with rage, and His tongue be as a devouring fire;
Isa 30:28 and His breath shall be as an overflowing stream, which reaches up to the neck, to sift the nations with a sieve of falsehood, and a misleading bridle on the jaws of the peoples.....
Isa 7:14 “Therefore יהוה Himself gives you a sign: Look, the maiden conceives and gives birth to a Son, and shall call His Name Immanu’ĕl - Ěl with us.

If we wanted to examine all the convoluted work arounds we could visit Rabbinical or Kariate forums..but this is the Yada Yah forum. And we're bad, bad, and "anti-semitic" for not heeding his wisdom.
Offline James  
#25 Posted : Monday, October 22, 2012 3:08:36 AM(UTC)
James
Joined: 10/23/2007(UTC)
Posts: 2,612
Man
Location: Texas

Thanks: 5 times
Was thanked: 210 time(s) in 148 post(s)
dajstill wrote:
JamesH,

I just don't understand your leap from "NT" is corrupt to "there was no Yahowsha'". That seems like a really, really big leap. Have you discounted the prophesies saying He would be coming at the time Yahowsha' is said to have arrived? We do know that people were looking for a Messiah at the time, we know this from Ram Bam's actions with his false Messiah that got many slaughtered in an ill fated war. So, have you thrown out those prophesies?

I am I an asking that you walk me through your conclusion. Because if there was no "Messiah" that came at the appointed time we have a really, really big problem.


I have to agree with dajstill. Yes the Greek text is highly unreliable, but we don't need it to know what happened in 33CE.

And there was never a messiah, as Yada and I pointed out a few weeks back on the Shabat show the word messiah is never once used as a title in Scripture, it is used as an adjective, and therefor should never have been transliterated as Messisah, but rather translated as anointed.

My question would be if you are discounting the arrival of Yahowsha in 33CE, then who was Daniel speaking of in chapter 9. The timing works out perfectly for it to be Yahowsha. Arriving in Jerusalem exactly 4 days before Pesach, exactly when the Pesach lamb would be brought in.
Don't take my word for it, Look it up.

“The truth is not for all men but only for those who seek it.” ― Ayn Rand
Offline dajstill  
#26 Posted : Monday, October 22, 2012 4:02:37 AM(UTC)
dajstill
Joined: 11/23/2011(UTC)
Posts: 748
Location: Alabama

Was thanked: 4 time(s) in 4 post(s)
cgb2 wrote:
Let him go Dajstill. As amply demonstrated in the Isa 7:14 thread linked above, no amount of evidence or reason can get through to him. He's found a rabbinical website convoluting the "maiden" vs "virgin" so like them will twist/ignore the whole council of the T/P/P to fit. We didn't even get into the immanuel - God with us part. Folks like this don't think and can't put 2 and 2 together. He admits the Great day of YHWH is all over in scripture. Picture this fulfillment as an example ;^)



cgb2,

I think I am sensitive to JamesH because I can understand getting confused and off on a rabbit trail when it comes to Yahowsha'. I think JamesH original premise was correct in that there was an elephant in the room with Yahowsha' and that was we had a much stronger written record of things that happened before Yahowsha' than of things that happened during His time on earth. That is hard to swallow after the excitement of finding the truth of the Torah unleashed from Rabbi and Priest tampering. The truth just comes rushing through and it all makes perfect sense, then it just ends and you are left with nothing to get excited about, to dig through, to find "truth". It is disappointing. I have been there. I have longed for something to hold on to from the NT, only to find it turn to mush in my hands as I found out that this verse was added here and this prayer can't be true and he never said this or that. It's frustrating. For a time I wondered myself - was Yahowsha' even real?

The turn I took was one that maybe not everyone takes, but it was comfortable for me. That was the work of Yahowsha' was between Yahowsha' and Yahowah. It didn't concern me. It wasn't a "man and God" thing it was a "Yahowah/Yahowsha'" thing which is why Yahowah walked the covenant with Abraham Himself with Abraham slept. I don't need to understand the intricate nature of Yahowah/Yahowsha' because this piece, this part is not a "man" part, but a spiritual aspect. I turned my focus back to where I was told to focus - on Yahowah and the Set Apart Spirit (honor thy Father and thy Mother). Yes, I believe the work of Yahowsha' was done, yes I believe His disciples walked, talked, and ate with Him - just as others walked, talked, and ate with Him in the past. But if I was supposed to pursue a relationship with Him and have a deep understanding of Him, Yahowah would have asked me to. He didn't. Probably because He knew what the Christian religion would do in making Him a personal deity they could manipulate and what the Jewish religion would do in soiling His name and His work because they wanted the credit in "saving man" by creating their own torah.

However, did Yahowah tell Moseh to talk to the lamb they slew they first passover? Did He say to get to know it, hug it, kiss it, honor it, or adore it? No. All the children of Israel were supposed to do with the lamb was inspect it, then eat it. Yahowsha' represents the Word of Yahowah - inspect and eat it. Yahowsha' on earth came this one time, in this one way to be inspected to ensure He met the requirements necessary to be a passover Lamb. Just as I wasn't there to inspect the lamb that Moseh chose, I wasn't there to inspect Lamb claiming to be Yahowsha'. All I know is the lamb Moseh chose was good enough for Yahowah that first Passover, and the Lamb claiming to be Yahowsha' in 33 CE seems to also have been good enough for Yahowah.

If I spend too much time trying to understand the science behind "God as man" or "is He or isn't he" I am going to miss the things I am supposed to be concentrating on - like walking away from Babylon without singing "jingle bells" or intentionally taking the long way so that I can pass the pretty Christmas lights. All I am supposed to do is eat the Lamb/Torah - not try to bring it back to life, jump in the fire to retrieve the ashes in order to send them for anaysis, or wonder if there was maybe another lamb I should have chosen that is still out in the field. I can't get stuck at Passover, Unleavened Bread, and FirstFruits when I am focused on being ready for Trumpets!

Yes, it's confusing. However, I have to think that is why Yahowah had Abram sleep (Genesis 15: 12 - 21) during the covenant process.
Offline pilgrimhere  
#27 Posted : Monday, October 22, 2012 8:25:50 AM(UTC)
pilgrimhere
Joined: 1/11/2012(UTC)
Posts: 154
Man
Location: TX

Was thanked: 8 time(s) in 6 post(s)
Contemplating matters far outside of one’s paradigm is an abrasive and arduous process that few are willing to engage in. I have great appreciation for you dajstill as well as several others here. What follows is a reflection of the process I am continuing in an effort to know Yahowah:

Currently, very little attention is given to Yahowsha in my house because of uncertainties. This will likely change as I gain understanding and knowledge. Regarding a virgin birth, such a scenario is entirely a matter of faith. That’s fine with me because I don’t figure that a vb was required. If a virgin with child was a sign, who would have seen it? Who could have confirmed it? Where the rubber meets the road, only the mother could have been certain. What kind of sign is that? The notion drips with Babel that has been recycled throughout the ages. The probability of injecting the ‘woman impregnated by god’ myth into the Greek manuscripts is not implausible.

Nonetheless, a child was born and a son was given – a man was born from above with Yahowa’s spirit which also departed prior to the man’s death. That man accomplished the work of Yahowa while living as a man in whom was a unique manifestation of Yah’s spirit beyond my comprehension. The man apparently did not have his own spirit as we have when we are born from above. When he said, “… the Father is in me, and I am in the Father” I understand that to be Yah’s spirit making up Yahowsha’s spiritual identity as opposed to Yah’s spirit temporarily empowering him as previous prophets had been (who had their own spiritual identity).

dajstill, I suspect the time that a perfect lamb was taken into the home from the flock outside was more than just for inspection. In those four days, the family would have become familiar and possibly affectionate with the lamb giving much more substance to the sacrifice than just an animal picked out from a flock. Yahowsha directed people’s attention to Yah’s Towrah and so that is what I am turning to. I also suspect that I may learn much more about who Yahowsha is from T/P/P than Mtt. and John … perhaps. I agree with you that we are better off keeping our eyes on the road than examining how the road was laid. What’s most important needs to come first.

JamesH, I have no animosity toward you but do not sense the genuine response to “seek me, and find me, when you shall search for me with all your heart” (Jeremiah 29:13) in your posts that draws me to this forum. At the same time, I cringe at the confrontational remarks but share the low tolerance for instigating rhetoric. I can never really tell where you are coming from until after contention is evident and so have an aversion to your input here. If your questions were preceded with some statement of where you stand and revealed whether you have already concluded the matter, your input might elicit more productive interest. I most certainly share your regret in adhering to the deception for so many years ... and teaching it. Presently, I don't know how much poison is in the water of the eye witness accounts so I don't drink it all in carelessly. Still, there is enough information consistent with T/P/P to discern what Yahowa has done/is going to do. Comprehending Yahowsha's role is becoming more clear, but I give my attention to and place my trust in Yah.
Offline needhelp  
#28 Posted : Tuesday, October 23, 2012 4:15:23 AM(UTC)
needhelp
Joined: 5/19/2011(UTC)
Posts: 197
Location: US


Well said Pilgrimhere. I have wondered many times about
Yahowsha's childhood and have come up with many
scenerios over the years. Here is one:

Yahowsha was born during "Sukah". There are no special
teachings or instructions between Sukah and Pesach(fall
and spring). We are told very little of Yahowsha's childhood.
Yahowsha fulfilled Pesach, Matsah and Bikurim. Hence his
life. Shabuwa starts our history. Yahowsha will return to
fulfill Taruwah and Kippurym. Full circle/cycle. Yahowsha was
the Torah in flesh, we are told about the parts of his human
life that pertained to it. (We do not get a full history of a
chicken when we buy it, just how to use or misuse it.)
Yahowsha's childhood did nothing for the Torah but give him
time to grow up and learn. He was probably a normal child,
not fast forwarded to adulthood, same as fall to spring. Neither
are we told anything about now, same as spring to fall,Bikurim
to Taruah. When the time comes he will fulfill the last Miqra'
just as we have been told. There is info on this part of his life.
Therefore his childhood is not relevent. Yahowah has many
more things for us to learn than something as unimportant as
whether or Yahowsha was potty-trained at 6 months or a year.
We were told what is important so that maybe we wouldn't get
as confused as we now are worrying about moot things. That
goes for virgin birth also. He was born of a human woman, not
a cow or a cat. End of information,end of debate. It doesn't
matter how he got there.

Hope that came out right.
Offline lassie1865  
#29 Posted : Tuesday, October 23, 2012 5:55:42 AM(UTC)
lassie1865
Joined: 2/18/2008(UTC)
Posts: 309
Woman
Location: Colorado

As for Yahowsha's childhood, I do think that some of it is addressed in Psalm 69.

It is also interesting that his mother and siblings did not seem to understand him, nor act as if he were "from above". We are told that they thought he was 'crazy' at times. His parents did not seem to understand what he meant by his saying "I must be about my Father's business . . . " when tarrying in the Temple. You would think that Yoseph and Miriam would have emphasized the fact that Yahowsha was specially conceived, was the 'Savior', would sit on Dowd's throne, etc, and that would cause his siblings to be in awe of him, but that does not seem to be the case; they seem to have completely forgotten; they certainly treat him as a very ordinary child. Very puzzling -- just doesn't seem to fit with Luke's birth account.
Offline needhelp  
#30 Posted : Tuesday, October 23, 2012 10:35:43 AM(UTC)
needhelp
Joined: 5/19/2011(UTC)
Posts: 197
Location: US

He was a man, human. He probably was like any other child,
full of mischief and vinegar. The spirit of Yahowah descended
upon him after he was baptised according to Matthew 3:16, if
you believe Matthew. He had to grow up, hence the space
between Sukah and Pesach, fall and spring, no miqra' , no
different, nothing about childhood. Just a child.

Offline James  
#31 Posted : Tuesday, October 23, 2012 2:58:19 PM(UTC)
James
Joined: 10/23/2007(UTC)
Posts: 2,612
Man
Location: Texas

Thanks: 5 times
Was thanked: 210 time(s) in 148 post(s)
If Luke can be trusted this would indicate that their was little more to Yahowsha than just an average child:

Luke 2:43 When they had accomplished the days, as they returned, the Child יהושע stayed behind in Yerushalayim. And His parents did not know it,
Luke 2:44 but thinking He was in the company, they went a day’s journey, and were seeking Him among the relatives and friends.
Luke 2:45 And not having found Him, they returned to Yerushalayim, seeking Him.
Luke 2:46 And it came to be, after three days, that they found Him in the Set-apart Place, sitting in the midst of the teachers, both listening to them and asking them questions.
Luke 2:47 And all who heard Him were astonished at His understanding and answers.
Luke 2:48 And having seen Him, they were amazed. And His mother said to Him, “Son, why have You done this to us? See, Your father and I have been anxiously seeking You.”
Luke 2:49 And He said to them, “Why were you seeking Me? Did you not know that I had to be in the matters of My Father?”
Don't take my word for it, Look it up.

“The truth is not for all men but only for those who seek it.” ― Ayn Rand
Offline needhelp  
#32 Posted : Wednesday, October 24, 2012 3:12:23 AM(UTC)
needhelp
Joined: 5/19/2011(UTC)
Posts: 197
Location: US


Luke himself admits he was not an eyewitness. Therefore not
reliable, just hearsay or maybe stories written to uplift himself
in Theophilus' eyes. Others have written so will I. Luke 1:1-4
Luke includes an extended description of the events leading up to the birth, including the activities of Mary and the parents of John, as well as the later narratives about the visit of the shepherds, the speeches of Anna and Simeon, and the visit of the young boy Jesus to the Temple. None of these are included in Matthew or Mark.
John , maybe Matthew are the most reliable.
Offline cgb2  
#33 Posted : Saturday, October 27, 2012 8:09:59 PM(UTC)
cgb2
Joined: 5/14/2010(UTC)
Posts: 689
Location: Colorado

Thanks: 16 times
Was thanked: 24 time(s) in 18 post(s)
Just how essential is trusting and relying that Yah would and did fulfill his promises in 33CE via Yahowsha (P/UB/FF)?...and also will in the future (T/R/S). I see them all over T/P/P, Daniel, Isaiah, Psalms, the miqra, the symbolism in the exodus, etc. Psalms 2 is rather adamant too.
Did the clock start ticking in 30CE (Yahoccanon "prepare the way" - immersing Yahowsha) with 40 years of testing and destroyed and dispersed in the disporah in 70AD because they "didn't realize the time of their visitation"?

What is His name and what is his Son's name, do you know? (Psalms?)
Offline JamesH  
#34 Posted : Sunday, October 28, 2012 5:23:53 AM(UTC)
JamesH
Joined: 1/8/2008(UTC)
Posts: 356
Location: Fresno, CA

Was thanked: 3 time(s) in 2 post(s)
What is his name ?
YHWH  the Almighty Shepherd

What is his sons name?
The Children of Israel  his first born son  (Exodus 4 :22)

Psalms ?
Is not the Torah of YHWH
Offline cgb2  
#35 Posted : Sunday, October 28, 2012 5:36:50 AM(UTC)
cgb2
Joined: 5/14/2010(UTC)
Posts: 689
Location: Colorado

Thanks: 16 times
Was thanked: 24 time(s) in 18 post(s)
JamesH wrote:
What is his name ?
YHWH  the Almighty Shepherd

What is his sons name?
The Children of Israel  his first born son  (Exodus 4 :22)

Psalms ?
Is not the Torah of YHWH


Welcome back JamesH

1) Massayah Yahowsha = implement doing the work of Yah, Yah saves. Isa 40, 53 (arm of YHWH), etc.

2) Exo 4:22 “And you shall say to Pharaoh, ‘Thus said יהוה, “Yisra’ĕl is My son, My first-born,
Exo 4:23 so I say to you, let My son go to serve Me. But if you refuse to let him go, see, I am killing your son, your first-born.” ’ ”
Giant leap from a metaphor.

3) At least you are speaking clearly now. So are the 1st 5 books (Torah) the only ones you accept? Do you also reject the prophets too?
Offline cgb2  
#36 Posted : Sunday, October 28, 2012 5:46:20 AM(UTC)
cgb2
Joined: 5/14/2010(UTC)
Posts: 689
Location: Colorado

Thanks: 16 times
Was thanked: 24 time(s) in 18 post(s)
Psa 2:1 Why do the gentiles rage, And the peoples meditate emptiness?
Psa 2:2 The sovereigns of the earth take their stand, And the rulers take counsel together, Against יהוה and against His Messiah, and say,
Psa 2:3 “Let us tear apart Their bonds, And throw away Their ropes from us.”
Psa 2:4 He who is sitting in the heavens laughs, יהוה mocks at them.
Psa 2:5 Then He speaks to them in His wrath, And troubles them in His rage, saying,
Psa 2:6 “But I, I have set My Sovereign on Tsiyon, My set-apart mountain.”
Psa 2:7 “I inscribe for a law: יהוה has said to Me, ‘You are My Son, Today I have brought You forth.
Psa 2:8 ‘Ask of Me, and I make the gentiles Your inheritance, And the ends of the earth Your possession.
Psa 2:9 ‘Break them with a rod of iron, Dash them to pieces like a potter’s vessel.’ ”
Psa 2:10 And now, be wise, O sovereigns; Be instructed, you rulers of the earth.
Psa 2:11 Serve יהוה with fear, And rejoice with trembling.
Psa 2:12 Kiss the Son, lest He be enraged, And you perish in the way, For soon His wrath is to be kindled. Blessed are all those taking refuge in Him.
==================================
Psalm 2
1 Why (mah – for what purpose) are the Gentiles (gowym – people from different races and places) and the nations (la’om – the cultural, religious, and political associations) in actual and total rebellion (ragas – in open defiance, conspiring to completely overthrow the proper authority (qal perfect)), speaking passionately about (hagah – meditating upon and considering the implications of declaring conclusions forcefully, emotionally, and powerfully about) vain, worthless, and delusional fantasies (ryq – empty and unreliable promises, that which is of no advantage or benefit)?
2 Why do earthly (‘erets) royal rulers (melek – kings) and (wa) those who govern (razan – political, judicial, religious, and military officials) establish themselves in positions of authority (yasab – set themselves up and present themselves as authorities by defiantly taking a religious and political stand) while at the same time joining together (yahad – united and working as one) to conspire to rebel (yasad – to plan to establish a foundation and base to initiate a process to appoint and ordain one another to rise up together) against (‘al – placing themselves over and above) Yahowah (Yahowah) and (wa) against (‘al – placing themselves over and above) His Anointed (maseyah / masiyach – Yahowah’s Work [note: while the 2nd Psalm is extant among the Dead Sea Scrolls, this portion of the text is not, so we do not know if it was originally written Ma’aseyah or Maseyach])?
3 Let us of our own volition choose to pull apart, tear, and break (nataq – let us continuously sever, shatter, and separate (piel imperfect cohortative – telling us that those who consciously choose to consistently sever the ties between Yahowah and Yahowsha will endure the ongoing consequence of being eternally separated from them)) accordingly (‘eth) their teachings and bonds (mowserah – that which binds and connects them, especially their instruction and principles) and (wa) we shall throw off the bonds of the relationship (salak – we, of our own volition, will knowingly choose to habitually, continually, intensely, and violently reject any form of association (hiphil imperfect cohortative)) separating from us (min) their interwoven nature (‘aboth – that which is intertwined and connected as well as from the completion of their work)
4 Living (yasab – dwelling) in the heavens (ba ha shamaym – in the spiritual realm) Yahowah (Yahowah) is amused and laughs (sahaq – scoffs) by mocking and ridiculing them (la la’ag – by disparaging them). (11QPS from the Qumran collection)
Need verses 5-10
11 Work with Yahowah with reverence and respect, and rejoice with a passionate, emotional, and actively engaged response.
12 Embrace and pay attention to the directions, demonstrating your affection for the Son (bar – the radiant and enlightening one who is perfect and pure), lest He become displeased, and you wander from the way and cease to exist…. Blessed are all who rely upon Him for their salvation.
Offline JamesH  
#37 Posted : Sunday, October 28, 2012 6:56:45 AM(UTC)
JamesH
Joined: 1/8/2008(UTC)
Posts: 356
Location: Fresno, CA

Was thanked: 3 time(s) in 2 post(s)
Cgb2 

I don't reject the history , psalms and prophets UNLESS they contradict the Torah where Yah's covenant is found.

Cgb2
I don't understand your statement " giant leap from a metaphor "

Are you saying that the Children of Israel are not literally Yah's First born son?
Offline dajstill  
#38 Posted : Tuesday, October 30, 2012 3:10:39 AM(UTC)
dajstill
Joined: 11/23/2011(UTC)
Posts: 748
Location: Alabama

Was thanked: 4 time(s) in 4 post(s)
JamesH wrote:
What is his name ?
YHWH  the Almighty Shepherd

What is his sons name?
The Children of Israel  his first born son  (Exodus 4 :22)

Psalms ?
Is not the Torah of YHWH



JamesH,

I would love for you to explain whom you think Yahowah was referring to when he said to the Adversary in Genesis 3:15 "And I put enmity between you and the woman, and between your seed and her Seed. He shall crush your head, and you shall crush His heel."

The Children of Israel were always referred to as the seed of Abraham, Issac, and Jacob - no woman was mentioned. I am also not sure we can consider Israel having "crushed the head" of the Adversary.
Offline JamesH  
#39 Posted : Tuesday, October 30, 2012 5:14:55 AM(UTC)
JamesH
Joined: 1/8/2008(UTC)
Posts: 356
Location: Fresno, CA

Was thanked: 3 time(s) in 2 post(s)
Hi dajstill

Well to start with Yah spoke three different curses. One to the snake, One to the woman and one to the man.

I think you would agree that the curse to the woman and the man are literal.

 I come from a farming background and I have seen my Grandfather, Father and many others literally experience the curse to man.

So I would say that the curse to the snake is literal also.

Just this summer alone I have killed two very large snakes that were in my chicken coop eating young chickens and eggs.

I literally stomped on their head

Also the children of Israel literally experienced the serpent in the wilderness

So the answer to the  question you asked me would be. " I think all three curses are literal and still continuing today.
Offline JamesH  
#40 Posted : Tuesday, October 30, 2012 6:05:11 AM(UTC)
JamesH
Joined: 1/8/2008(UTC)
Posts: 356
Location: Fresno, CA

Was thanked: 3 time(s) in 2 post(s)
One more thing dajstill 

The word adversary is not used

The word is nachash, snake
Offline dajstill  
#41 Posted : Tuesday, October 30, 2012 7:04:18 AM(UTC)
dajstill
Joined: 11/23/2011(UTC)
Posts: 748
Location: Alabama

Was thanked: 4 time(s) in 4 post(s)
JamesH wrote:
One more thing dajstill 

The word adversary is not used

The word is nachash, snake


So you think it was a talking snake in the garden?
Offline cgb2  
#42 Posted : Tuesday, October 30, 2012 7:11:31 AM(UTC)
cgb2
Joined: 5/14/2010(UTC)
Posts: 689
Location: Colorado

Thanks: 16 times
Was thanked: 24 time(s) in 18 post(s)
JamesH wrote:
Cgb2 
I don't reject the history , psalms and prophets UNLESS they contradict the Torah where Yah's covenant is found.


How is this determined?
english version, amplified, lexicons, doctrinal websites?

JamesH wrote:
Cgb2
I don't understand your statement " giant leap from a metaphor "

Are you saying that the Children of Israel are not literally Yah's First born son?


Perhaps "metaphor" was a poor choice of words...how about "comparative statement - pun".
Offline JamesH  
#43 Posted : Tuesday, October 30, 2012 12:34:08 PM(UTC)
JamesH
Joined: 1/8/2008(UTC)
Posts: 356
Location: Fresno, CA

Was thanked: 3 time(s) in 2 post(s)
dajstill wrote:
So you think it was a talking snake in the garden?



Dajstill that is the two dollar question. :)

I don't know the answer. It sure seems to say a talking snake!

I can only speculate that man and animals behaved different in the garden.
Offline JamesH  
#44 Posted : Tuesday, October 30, 2012 12:53:31 PM(UTC)
JamesH
Joined: 1/8/2008(UTC)
Posts: 356
Location: Fresno, CA

Was thanked: 3 time(s) in 2 post(s)
cgb2 wrote:




Perhaps "metaphor" was a poor choice of words...how about "comparative statement - pun".



Cgb2

I'm not trying to play any games here, but I really don't know what pun or comparative statement you are referring to.

Are you saying that the Children of Israel are not literally Yah's First born son?
Offline cgb2  
#45 Posted : Tuesday, October 30, 2012 4:17:20 PM(UTC)
cgb2
Joined: 5/14/2010(UTC)
Posts: 689
Location: Colorado

Thanks: 16 times
Was thanked: 24 time(s) in 18 post(s)
JamesH wrote:
Cgb2

I'm not trying to play any games here, but I really don't know what pun or comparative statement you are referring to.
Are you saying that the Children of Israel are not literally Yah's First born son?


Yitshaq was Abrahams first born (YHWH didn't even consider Ishmeal). Yitshaq renamed Yishreal. Children of Isreal. COmparative statement or what ever: so I say to you, let My son go to serve Me. But if you refuse to let him go, see, I am killing your son, your first-born.

But yes you are playing games, by picking on minutia and dodging more critical questions:

JamesH wrote:
I don't reject the history , psalms and prophets UNLESS they contradict the Torah where Yah's covenant is found.


How is this determined?
english version, amplified, lexicons, doctrinal websites?

If you don't want to answer, or embarased to, fine....just don't expect me to waste my time responding anymore.
Offline FredSnell  
#46 Posted : Tuesday, October 30, 2012 5:16:05 PM(UTC)
FredSnell
Joined: 1/29/2011(UTC)
Posts: 874
Location: Houston, Texas

Thanks: 14 times
Was thanked: 3 time(s) in 3 post(s)
dajstill wrote:
So you think it was a talking snake in the garden?



Matthew 10:16
"Behold, I send you forth as sheep in the midst of wolves: be ye therefore wise as serpents, and harmless as doves."
Genesis 3:1
Now the serpent was more subtil than any beast of the field which the YHWH had made. And he said unto the woman, Yea, hath God said, Ye shall not eat of every tree of the garden?
Offline James  
#47 Posted : Wednesday, October 31, 2012 3:51:50 AM(UTC)
James
Joined: 10/23/2007(UTC)
Posts: 2,612
Man
Location: Texas

Thanks: 5 times
Was thanked: 210 time(s) in 148 post(s)
I would point out with regard to the serpent in Eden:

Rev 12:9 And the great dragon was thrown out, that serpent of old, called the Devil and Satan, who leads all the world astray. He was thrown to the earth, and his messengers were thrown out with him.

I know JamesH that you dismiss all of the Greek text, and that is your prerogative. Personally I am highly skeptical of it, but what can be verified in the oldest manuscripts I lend more credibility to, and this verse is extant in three manuscripts, with no variations that I can find.

That said even with out the Revelation verse I am still inclined to view the Serpent as a metaphor for the adversary.The role the serpent plays is that of the adversary, beguiling man and leading him away from God. So while it may have been a literal snake in the garden it was certainly working on behalf of the adversary, just as Paul was a literal man working on behalf of the adversary.
Don't take my word for it, Look it up.

“The truth is not for all men but only for those who seek it.” ― Ayn Rand
Offline JamesH  
#48 Posted : Wednesday, October 31, 2012 6:00:11 AM(UTC)
JamesH
Joined: 1/8/2008(UTC)
Posts: 356
Location: Fresno, CA

Was thanked: 3 time(s) in 2 post(s)
Hi James

James wrote: I know JamesH that you dismiss all of the Greek text, and that is your prerogative. Personally I am highly skeptical of it, but what can be verified in the oldest manuscripts I lend more credibility to, and this verse is extant in three manuscripts, with no variations that I can find.

Yes it is true that I have dismissed all of the Greek text and it is only recently that I have done so.

Here is another perfect reason why.

Without the Greek text p47 written in the 3rd century ce by who knows who. There would not be a connection or metaphor between the two words “ Snake/ Satan”

Nowhere in the Torah, Prophets or Psalms is a metaphor between the two words “ Snake/ Satan” made.
The Hebrew words are quite different. Also the Hebrew language does not use metaphors.

The Greek language uses metaphors, abstract thinking and reasoning which lead people to wrong conclusions.

In Job, Yah’s word uses (satan) which does translate to adversary.
And in Genesis the word used is (nachash) snake.

Here comes the question
Why would YHWH curse the snake if satan did the dirty work?
And
Does man need satan to be present to sin?
All three curses are literal, no metaphors.
Offline James  
#49 Posted : Wednesday, October 31, 2012 7:37:47 AM(UTC)
James
Joined: 10/23/2007(UTC)
Posts: 2,612
Man
Location: Texas

Thanks: 5 times
Was thanked: 210 time(s) in 148 post(s)
JamesH wrote:
Without the Greek text p47 written in the 3rd century ce by who knows who. There would not be a connection or metaphor between the two words “ Snake/ Satan”


A Connection was made between the serpent and the adversary long before P47 r the book of revelation. The Talmudic rabbis debated the issue with most concluding that the serpent was a representative of the adversary. I am not claiming the Talmud as authoritative, but only pointing out that man was drawing a connection between the two before Revelation, just as I had. I have not spent a lot of time in the Greek text, and only found that verse after a search. I drew that conclusion without having read it in revelation, and was only citing it as evidence.

Why do I draw the conclusion? For starters I don’t believe that snakes at one point could talk and have lost that ability over time. Let alone that they could talk and spoke the same language as man. Now this may have been the case, but I have a hard time believing that. So my natural inclination is to attempt to find a more reasonable understanding. Given the role the serpent plays, deceiving and tempting man, my first conclusion is that the serpent represents the adversary in this context. The serpent was there to present an alternative to God. And the serpent used the same tactics, twisting God’s word, to deceive as the adversary. Also just looking at the word adversary it certainly applies to the serpent, it was adverse to both man and God in the garden. So rather it was The Adversary it is appropriate to call it an adversary.

Also if we are to view the whole incident literally then only Adam, Chawah and that particular serpent would be cursed, because Yah never mentions their offspring or descendants being cursed other than between the woman’s seed and the serpent’s seed. So either only they were cursed, or they each represented all of their kind, in which case the whole thing is not literal.


JamesH wrote:
Also the Hebrew language does not use metaphors.


I beg to differ. The Torah is full of metaphor. As I just pointed out unless you think only Adam and Chawah were cursed then Adam server to represent metaphorically all men, and Chawah server to metaphorically represent all women. Was Ishmael’s hand literally against everyone, and everyone’s hand literally against his? Of course not these were metaphors. Gen 49:17 was Dan literally a serpent? No it was a metaphor. I could go on and on. Yahowah uses metaphors all the time.

JamesH wrote:
Why would YHWH curse the snake if satan did the dirty work?


IF the serpent is a metaphor for the adversary then the serpent wasn’t cursed, but the adversary was. The fact that the serpent crawls about on it’s belly is probably the very reason that the metaphor was used.

[qupte=JamesH]Does man need satan to be present to sin?


No, man is capable of it all by ourselves, but the role the adversary plays is that of deceiving and tempting us.

JamesH wrote:
All three curses are literal, no metaphors.


If all three are literal then they only apply to Adam, Chawah and that specific serpent, and enmity between the serpent’s seed and Chawah’s seed. So unless you are saying that the curses only applied to them then we both see it as metaphorical, we just see different metaphors.
Don't take my word for it, Look it up.

“The truth is not for all men but only for those who seek it.” ― Ayn Rand
Offline JamesH  
#50 Posted : Wednesday, October 31, 2012 9:59:32 AM(UTC)
JamesH
Joined: 1/8/2008(UTC)
Posts: 356
Location: Fresno, CA

Was thanked: 3 time(s) in 2 post(s)
The word Metaphor is a Greek word " meta - phore "

There is no Hebrew equivalent 

So you would be using greek understanding to  translate Hebrew. That is why you can come up with a different understanding than I have. 

All snakes are cursed
Users browsing this topic
2 Pages12>
Forum Jump  
You cannot post new topics in this forum.
You cannot reply to topics in this forum.
You cannot delete your posts in this forum.
You cannot edit your posts in this forum.
You cannot create polls in this forum.
You cannot vote in polls in this forum.