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

Notification

Icon
Error

5 Pages<12345>
Options
View
Go to last post Go to first unread
Offline Yada  
#101 Posted : Saturday, January 23, 2010 7:20:41 AM(UTC)
Yada
Joined: 6/28/2007(UTC)
Posts: 3,537

Another question I have included in the first chapter is the use of the Chi Rho. Yada writes:

Quote:
The title “Messiyah” was represented by Chi Rho (ΧΡ), Chi Rho Sigma (ΧΡΣ), Chi Sigma (ΧΣ), Chi Rho Sigma (ΧΡΣ), Chi Upsilon (ΧΥ), Chi Rho Upsilon (ΧΡΥ), Chi Omega (ΧΩ), Chi Rho Omega (ΧΡΩ), and Chi Nu (ΧΝ). More on these Divine Placeholders in a moment.


I've tried to do some research on this but wouldn't those who display, what looks like an "X" and "P", simply tell you that this is a symbol which represents the title Messiyah?
If you'd like to join the YY Study Group room on Paltalk - just click here. The lockword is: yadayahweh
You can download the free software here.
Hope to see everyone on Paltalk!
WARNING: Do not give out personal information (name, address, etc.) to anyone on Paltalk - ever!
Offline Swalchy  
#102 Posted : Saturday, January 23, 2010 8:27:59 AM(UTC)
Swalchy
Joined: 7/4/2007(UTC)
Posts: 250
Man
Location: England

Yada wrote:
So, which was it - could the original authors written out the Names and titles if they had intended?, or, "the Divine Placeholders ΚΣ and ΚΥ were used to designate Yahuweh’s name in a language whose alphabet could not replicate its sounds"?

I must confess I'm still not clear on the purpose of the use of these "placeholders." Perhaps someone on the forum can help clear this up for me.

Thanks.


From what we know from Greek manuscripts of the Torah, Prophets and Psalms discovered amongst the Dead Sea Scrolls, the Jews who wrote the manuscripts would put YHWH in Paleo-Hebrew in the Greek manuscript, as the following picture shows:

UserPostedImage

But when Hebrew was becoming more or less a dead language during the 1st Century CE for the vast preponderance for the people at the time, the "Divine Placeholders" were introduced so that people could understand what was being said, rather than being confused by the Hebrew letters used.

Greek lacks equivalent letters to the Hebrew H, Y, W, so being able to properly transliterate Yahuweh into Greek characters is impossible, so they didn't bother
Offline James  
#103 Posted : Saturday, January 23, 2010 9:52:03 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)
Yada wrote:
So, which was it - could the original authors written out the Names and titles if they had intended?, or, "the Divine Placeholders ΚΣ and ΚΥ were used to designate Yahuweh’s name in a language whose alphabet could not replicate its sounds"?


What Yada was saying is that the names that replaced the placeholders, could have been written by the original authors, had they wanted to, but since they didn't write those names, and they did use the placeholders, it is obvious that the names that later replaced the placeholders, where not intended by the authors.

Example:
If the authors had wanted to convey Iesous where Yahushua's name was they could have, but since they chose to use the placeholder Iota Epsilon (ΙΗ), we can be certain that Iesous was not what they meant to convey, and replacing Iota Epsilon (ΙΗ)with Iseus was wrong.

SO in when Yada says that they replaced the placeholders with names that could have been rendered had the authors intended them to be rendered he means that they put Iesous where Iota Epsilon (ΙΗ)was, and that if the authors had meant Iesous they would have wrote Iesous, and not Iota Epsilon (ΙΗ).

Sorry if I was a bit redundant, but I'm never sure if I am explaining well, and figure redundancy will fix my inability to communicate well.
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 Swalchy  
#104 Posted : Saturday, January 23, 2010 9:55:33 AM(UTC)
Swalchy
Joined: 7/4/2007(UTC)
Posts: 250
Man
Location: England

@ James: It's actually Iota Eta, not Iota Epsilon (Iota Eta = IH; Iota Epsilon = IE).

And your explanation is fine James :)
Offline James  
#105 Posted : Saturday, January 23, 2010 10:17:12 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)
Swalchy wrote:
@ James: It's actually Iota Eta, not Iota Epsilon (Iota Eta = IH; Iota Epsilon = IE).

And your explanation is fine James :)

My Bad. It's all Greek to me.
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 James  
#106 Posted : Saturday, January 23, 2010 10:20:19 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)
Swalchy wrote:
@ James: It's actually Iota Eta, not Iota Epsilon (Iota Eta = IH; Iota Epsilon = IE).

And your explanation is fine James :)


You might want to correct Yada on that, I copied the Iota Epsilon (IH) from the Chrestus chapter.
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 edStueart  
#107 Posted : Saturday, January 23, 2010 2:16:17 PM(UTC)
edStueart
Joined: 10/29/2008(UTC)
Posts: 370
Location: Philadelphia

Here is a book that offers a more charitable reading of Rabbi Shaul's letter to the Galatians.

I have become acquainted with the author and have enjoyed talking with him.

Paul Didn't Eat Pork: Reappraising Paul The Pharisee (Paperback)


UserPostedImage

Lehman neither throws Paul under the bus, nor deifies him. He puts Paul's letter in historical and societal context.

This is a "gateway book" for those who are not quite ready for YY, TOM, etc.
"You shall know the truth, and the truth shall set you free."
But first, it will piss you off!
Offline James  
#108 Posted : Sunday, January 24, 2010 9:21:59 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)
RidesWithYah wrote:
I'm all for careful examination to comprehend the message.
But I believe we're called to do both -- DO, and carefully examine, so that we understand the reasons and the lessons.
It's the key to building our relationship with Yah.
(In my mind, Matthew 5:17-20 says this EXACTLY -- "whoever practices AND teaches these commands will be called great in the kingdom of heaven")

Yahshua didn't tell us to "understand" or "comprehend"; he told us to "do" and to "obey".

See for example:
Matthew 7:21-23
Matthew 28:18-20
Mark 10:17-27
Luke 6:46-49
Luke 10:25-28
John 15:1-17
Ja'aqob (James) 1:19-27
1John2:1-8

Looked at another way--
The family is a picture of Yahweh's relationship with us.
I remember being a rebellious teenager in my parents' home.
They would have preferred my following their rules because I understood completely the reasons for them;
They would have settled for my following their rules blindly because I trusted them to know what's best;
We could have reasonably coexisted, had I followed their rules out of respect.
There would have been hell to pay if I told them I didn't have to follow their rules -- that they were going to love me even if I didn't obey, because I was under grace.
And I don't think it would have gone much more smoothly had I said "I'm not going to follow the rules, but yes, I understand them."


RideswithYah, I can't speak for Yada, but as I understand it, what he is trying to say is that understanding the Torah's message is necessary, following it to the T is not, as that is impossible. We should attempt to follow it as much as we can, but none of us is capable of following it perfectly, we are all however capable of understanding it's message enough to rely on Yahuweh.

I don't think Yada is saying that yeah we can just go ahead and ignore what it says to do, because that is not important. What he is saying, I think, is that we should try to follow it as best as possible, but doing that is not going to save you, whereas understanding the message will save you. I think he put it one place as understanding is necessary, doing is advisable.
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 RidesWithYah  
#109 Posted : Sunday, January 24, 2010 10:58:50 AM(UTC)
RidesWithYah
Joined: 6/10/2008(UTC)
Posts: 331

Yes, I got a note back from Yada, and it sounds like we're all in one accord.

Just when I read that section of the new chapters, it sounded heavy on the "understanding", and light on the "doing".

In His Love,
RidesWithYah.
Offline Mike  
#110 Posted : Friday, January 29, 2010 4:55:52 AM(UTC)
Mike
Joined: 10/2/2007(UTC)
Posts: 534
Location: Texas

Thanks: 6 times
Was thanked: 21 time(s) in 13 post(s)
I thought about this when I woke up Monday morning. Maybe this is all wrong but could Mat 16:18 be a pun, a play on words?

Could “Gates of Hell” be translated “entrance of Sha’ul”?

Mat 16:18 AndG1161 I say alsoG2504 G3004 unto thee,G4671 ThatG3754 thouG4771 artG1488 Peter,G4074 andG2532 uponG1909 thisG5026 rockG4073 I will buildG3618 myG3450 church;G1577 andG2532 the gatesG4439 of hellG86 shall notG3756 prevail againstG2729 it.G846

Could it be translated this way? G86 is the Greek word Hades but if Yahshua was speaking to Kepha in Aramaic or Hebrew he would have said H7585 Sheol, right, but written without vowel points H7585 Sheol is the same as H7586 Shaul.

Mat 16:18 “And I also say to you that you are Kĕpha, and on this rock I shall build My assembly, and the entrance of Sha’ul shall not overcome it. ?

G4439
πύλη
pulē
poo'-lay
Apparently a primary word; a gate, that is, the leaf or wing of a folding entrance (literally or figuratively): - gate.

G86
ᾅδης
hadēs
hah'-dace
From G1 (as a negative particle) and G1492; properly unseen, that is, “Hades” or the place (state) of departed souls: - grave, hell.

H7585
שׁאל שׁאול
she'ôl she'ôl
sheh-ole', sheh-ole'
From H7592; hades or the world of the dead (as if a subterranian retreat), including its accessories and inmates: - grave, hell, pit.

H7586
שׁאוּל
shâ'ûl
shaw-ool'
Passive participle of H7592; asked; Shaul, the name of an Edomite and two Israelites: - Saul, Shaul.

I e-mailed this to Yada on Monday and he said that he would investigate it further. Any thoughts?

Offline Swalchy  
#111 Posted : Friday, January 29, 2010 5:17:50 AM(UTC)
Swalchy
Joined: 7/4/2007(UTC)
Posts: 250
Man
Location: England

Well, it would have to be entrances, for the Greek word is plural, not singular (hence gates). But then, πύλη are the doors to the entrance, not the actual entrance-way itself.

So, the "folding doors of Sha'uwl" doesn't make much sense at all to me.
Offline James  
#112 Posted : Friday, January 29, 2010 8:22:58 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'm going to yield to Swalch here, he knows a great deal more of Greek than me.
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 RidesWithYah  
#113 Posted : Friday, January 29, 2010 3:48:05 PM(UTC)
RidesWithYah
Joined: 6/10/2008(UTC)
Posts: 331

Need help with Greek --

In the new chapters, Yada mentions the prophecy of Yahshua, which is recorded in Matthew 24, Mark 13, and Luke 17, about false prophets.

The KJV of Matthew 24 reads
Quote:
5For many shall come in my name, saying, I am Christ; and shall deceive many.

The second comma, before "I am Christ", makes it read as though they are claiming to be "Christ".
Without the comma, it would read "saying I am Christ"; or, rather, acknowledging that Yahshua is the Messiyah.

I know the early manuscripts don't have the benefit of punctuation,
but do the words chosen (Matthew, Mark, or Luke) clarify whether Yahshua was warning that others would claim to be Him;
or that there would be false prophets that acknowledge Him, and yet deceive many?
Word choice would make a BIG difference in whether this verse is applicable to Sha'uwl.

Offline Matthew  
#114 Posted : Saturday, January 30, 2010 12:01:31 AM(UTC)
Matthew
Joined: 10/3/2007(UTC)
Posts: 1,191
Man
Location: São Paulo, Brazil

Was thanked: 2 time(s) in 2 post(s)
Hey Rides, try checking Swalchy's website to see what he's translated those passages as, you might find your answer there. I don't have time to check now for you, I'm leaving the house in less than a few minutes.
Offline danshelper  
#115 Posted : Saturday, January 30, 2010 2:01:09 AM(UTC)
danshelper
Joined: 11/30/2009(UTC)
Posts: 196
Location: Gettysburg, PA

That's a really good point RidesWithYah. From how I read Swalchy's translation it sounds like many will come acknowledging that Yahshua is the Messiah - not claiming to be the Messiah themselves.
Offline Matthew  
#116 Posted : Saturday, January 30, 2010 2:05:22 AM(UTC)
Matthew
Joined: 10/3/2007(UTC)
Posts: 1,191
Man
Location: São Paulo, Brazil

Was thanked: 2 time(s) in 2 post(s)
From Matthew 24:
Quote:
And having answered and replied their question, Yahushua* said to them “Perceive and examine, mentally discern and observe, discover and understand, consider and contemplate, pay close attention to and notice, direct your attention to and face, be aware of and take note that no certain someone may deceive or mislead you, lead you astray or cause you to wander, be mistaken or delude you, seduce or coerce you into error, for the reason that many numerous and large amounts of people shall come, arise and appear in, by and with My name or title, character or person, reputation or authority, saying and teaching, maintaining and affirming, exhorting and advising, directing and pointing out; ‘I am and exist as the Anointed Messiah*,’ and they shall deceive and mislead many, lead numerous amounts astray and cause many to wander, be mistaken and delude them, seduce and coerce them into error.


From Mark 13:
Quote:
Moreover, Yahushua* began and started to say and teach, maintain and affirm, direct and exhort, advise and point out to them, “Perceive and examine, mentally discern and observe, discover and understand, consider and contemplate, pay close attention to and notice, direct your attention to and face, be aware of and take note that no certain someone may deceive or mislead you, lead you astray or cause you to wander, be mistaken or delude you, seduce or coerce you into error. Many numerous and large amounts of people will come, arise and appear on the basis of and upon My name and title, character and person, reputation and authority, saying and teaching, maintaining and affirming, directing and exhorting, advising and pointing out that ‘I am and exist,’ and they will deceive and mislead many, lead numerous amounts astray and cause many to wander, be mistaken and delude them, seduce and coerce them into error.


From Luke 21:
Quote:
In reply, He said, “Perceive and examine, mentally discern and observe, discover and understand, consider and contemplate, pay close attention to and notice, direct your attention to and face, be aware of and take note that all of you may not be deceived or mislead, led astray or caused to wander, be mistaken or deluded, seduced or coerced into error. For the reason that many numerous and large amounts of people shall come, arise and appear on the basis of and upon My name and title, character and person, reputation and authority, saying and teaching, maintaining and affirming, directing and exhorting, advising and pointing out that ‘I am and exist,’ and ‘The favourable and opportune age and season has neared and come close, at hand and imminent.’ Do not travel, journey or proceed to go to follow after them.


All quotes taken from Swalchy`s website.
Offline James  
#117 Posted : Monday, February 1, 2010 9:42:17 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)
Rides with Yah, Yada addresses that verse in the anomos chapter of QP

QP Chapter 4 Anomos Lawless wrote:

For (gar) many (polys) will come (erchomai) in (en – [from Papyrus 70; whereas the more recent NA27 reads “by means of (epi)”]) My (ego) name (onoma – reputation), saying (lego – claiming), ‘I (ego) exist as, belong to, or represent (eimi – I am and I stand for) the (o) Messiyah (ΧΣ – the Implement of Yah). And (kai) many (polys) will wander away from the truth (planaomai – will be deceived and deluded).’” (Matthew 24:5)


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 James  
#118 Posted : Monday, February 1, 2010 9:46:31 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)
Here is Yada's commentary on it as well

QP Chapter 4 Anomo Lawless wrote:

Since it is easy to blend Yahshua’s thoughts together, let’s consider them one at a time. Initially He said: “many will come in My name,” and indeed, many have, but not all of those who have claimed to represent God have been deceitful.

The most literal rendering of eimi in the middle clause of this next verse, would suggest that Yahshua predicted that many people would say “I am the Messiah.” And while there have been plenty of isolated nutcases like this, with the most famous being Rabbi Akiva’s Shim’own Bar Kokhba, and the most recent being David Koresh of the Branch Davidians, their victims are usually counted in the hundreds, sometimes thousands, but seldom millions or billions.

Those who have led the most people astray, and thus satisfy the final clause of Yahshua’s prophetic warning, simply claim to “represent” the Messiah, which is one of eimi’s connotations. And while Paul would tell the Galatians that they had treated him as if he were the Messiyah, Paul typically claims to speak for him—to represent Him.

I would count the billions of Christians who have been led away from Yahweh and His Torah, who have been deceived and deluded by Paul’s Gospel of Grace, as “many.” In fact, it would be hard to identify another individual who has misled more people than Paul. It is why I refer to him as the most influential man who ever lived.

Second unto Paul would be “Muhammad,” who has also misled billions. But Allah’s Messenger only claimed to be the Messiyah as he approached Yathrib. It was following the Satanic Verses, when his tattered reputation needed a boost. Moreover, Muhammad never spoke in the Messiyah’s name, because he didn’t know it. The Qur’an calls Yahshua “Issa,” which is an Arabic transliteration of “Esau.” And Muhammad never claimed to represent the Messiyah, but instead Allah. So, he would be disqualified from this prophecy. Not to mention the fact that he lived six centuries after the lifetimes of Yahshua’s Disciples.

Then depending on whether eimi is rendered “exist as,” “belong to,” or “represent,” other candidates might be Rabbi Akiva, General Constantine, or Adolf Hitler. Although Barak Obama displays a bit of a messianic complex as well.




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 Matthew  
#119 Posted : Monday, February 1, 2010 10:04:00 AM(UTC)
Matthew
Joined: 10/3/2007(UTC)
Posts: 1,191
Man
Location: São Paulo, Brazil

Was thanked: 2 time(s) in 2 post(s)
Yada seems to suggest that the meaning of the word eimi also includes to "represent", in other words "I am, exist as, belong to, or represent, the Anointed Messiah", but Swalchy's translation doesn't include the word, his simply says "I am and exist as the Anointed Messiah".
Offline Theophilus  
#120 Posted : Tuesday, February 2, 2010 2:25:03 AM(UTC)
Theophilus
Joined: 7/5/2007(UTC)
Posts: 527
Man

Thanks: 3 times
I was listening to the Blog Talk Radio show from yestderady and heard Yada mention that the first few chapters are available on a website Yow'el created but is not linked to the main Yad Yahweh site at this time. I believe Yada mentioned this site as something like questioningpaul.com but have yet to find the actual site when making a google search. HAs anyone found the domain yet? If so can you share it here?

Thank you
Offline James  
#121 Posted : Tuesday, February 2, 2010 6:40:35 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)
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 RidesWithYah  
#122 Posted : Tuesday, February 2, 2010 1:27:53 PM(UTC)
RidesWithYah
Joined: 6/10/2008(UTC)
Posts: 331

All the talk about Paul has me doubting his student, Luke, who wrote Acts.

Someone please help me reconcile Matthew 27

Quote:
3When Judas, who had betrayed him, saw that Jesus was condemned, he was seized with remorse and returned the thirty silver coins to the chief priests and the elders. 4"I have sinned," he said, "for I have betrayed innocent blood."
"What is that to us?" they replied. "That's your responsibility." 5So Judas threw the money into the temple and left. Then he went away and hanged himself. 6The chief priests picked up the coins and said, "It is against the law to put this into the treasury, since it is blood money." 7So they decided to use the money to buy the potter's field as a burial place for foreigners. 8That is why it has been called the Field of Blood to this day. 9Then what was spoken by Jeremiah the prophet was fulfilled: "They took the thirty silver coins, the price set on him by the people of Israel, 10and they used them to buy the potter's field, as the Lord commanded me."


with Acts 1
Quote:
18(With the reward he got for his wickedness, Judas bought a field; there he fell headlong, his body burst open and all his intestines spilled out. 19Everyone in Jerusalem heard about this, so they called that field in their language Akeldama, that is, Field of Blood.)


Quotations are NIV. The Acts verses are in parentheses -- does this mean they weren't in the original manuscript, but were an editorial add at some point in history?
Offline Swalchy  
#123 Posted : Tuesday, February 2, 2010 1:30:38 PM(UTC)
Swalchy
Joined: 7/4/2007(UTC)
Posts: 250
Man
Location: England

There is actually no pre-Constantinian manuscripts of either Acts Chapter 1 or Matthew 27, so I really wouldn't bother about any apparent contradiction between what Matthew wrote, and what Luke wrote, as we have no reliable evidence of either.

I also wouldn't doubt Luke's historical reliability either. He hasn't let anything influence the history accounts that he wrote
Offline Matthew  
#124 Posted : Tuesday, February 2, 2010 11:58:01 PM(UTC)
Matthew
Joined: 10/3/2007(UTC)
Posts: 1,191
Man
Location: São Paulo, Brazil

Was thanked: 2 time(s) in 2 post(s)
I'm inclined to believe that Judas gave the money back to the priests who then bought the field because of Exodus 21:32 "If the ox gores a male or female servant, he is to give to their master thirty sheqels of silver, and the ox is stoned." And the parenthesis of Acts 1:18-19 is reminiscent of John 21:19 regarding a note of Peter's death, which Yada begs to differ on the interpretation of this John passage.
Offline danshelper  
#125 Posted : Wednesday, February 3, 2010 2:27:11 AM(UTC)
danshelper
Joined: 11/30/2009(UTC)
Posts: 196
Location: Gettysburg, PA

Yada writes in the Anomos chapter, pg 29 when discussing Acts 15:

"And while we’ve come to expect imprecision in Paul’s letters to
the Galatians, Thessalonians, and Corinthians, these mistakes were recorded in
the book of Acts, now causing it to be suspect as well."

So are just some parts of Acts questionable?

Offline Swalchy  
#126 Posted : Wednesday, February 3, 2010 8:59:31 AM(UTC)
Swalchy
Joined: 7/4/2007(UTC)
Posts: 250
Man
Location: England

Unfortunately, most of Acts 15 (actually, most of Acts itself) isn't extant in Pre-Constantine manuscripts. Only fragments of verses 2-7, 19-27, 38-41 are extant, so most of what is said outside of these verses should be looked upon with great suspicion.
Offline Marcus  
#127 Posted : Friday, February 5, 2010 5:14:47 AM(UTC)
Marcus
Joined: 9/8/2009(UTC)
Posts: 93
Location: NY

Hey guys I have not read all the available chapters yet and I know that Yada addresses this in the book somewhere. I wanted to know what you guys take on this was from thewaytoyahweh II Petros 3:16:



Therefore, for this reason and for this purpose, beloved and esteemed, dearly loved and highly regarded ones, anxiously expecting and waiting for, looking for and anticipating these things, be active and zealous, quick and assiduous, earnest and diligent, endeavour and be devoted, eager and in a hurry to make every effort to be found and discovered, observed and recognised, detected and learned about, understood and become known through enquiry and examination, thought and scrutiny, investigation and perception by Him to be within and inside peace and tranquillity, harmony and concord, security and safety, prosperity and freedom, exemption from chaos, felicity and the assurance of salvation, being without defect and spotless and clean, pure, free from corruption and without blemish, guiltless and faultless. And think and consider, seem and deem, reckon and regard the patience and endurance, forbearance and perseverance, steadfastness and restraint of our Sovereign Master* to be as deliverance and preservation, salvation and safety, just as and exactly as our beloved and esteemed, dearly loved and highly regarded brother and fellow brethren Paul* also wrote and inscribed, recorded and composed to all of you in accordance with and with regards to, in relation to and with respect to the wisdom and intelligence, knowledge, sophistication and insight that has been given and granted, supplied and furnished, bestowed and delivered, committed and permitted, extended and presented to him. Consequently and as a result, within and inside all individual and collective letters, messages and epistles speaking, chatting and talking about and concerning, regarding and on account of, because of and with respect to these things within and inside them, within and inside them are some certain things that are and exist as difficult to understand and hard to comprehend, which the uneducated and ignorant, stupid and unlearned, those without knowledge, and weak and unsteady, unstable and unsupported ones twist and distort, pervert and screw up, torture and wrench apart, just as, like and similar to their customary way they do to the rest of the remaining writings of Scripture, to the advantage of their own individual destruction and complete and utter ruin and waste, obliteration and annihilation. Then and therefore, accordingly, consequently and these things beings so, beloved and esteemed, dearly loved and highly regarded ones, as all of you have come to know and understand, perceive and realise, notice and discern, discover and observe, experience and ascertain, learn about and distinguish, judge and think about, comprehend, acknowledge and recognise this beforehand and in advance, keep and guard, hold on to and retain, attend to and maintain, keep an eye on and watch over, preserve and protect yourselves, so that and in order that all of you are not accommodated or led away, deceived or carried away in the same error and delusion, deceit and deception, corruption and fraudulence, sin and perversion, wickedness, vacillation and seduction of the abandoned and irreverent, undesirable and destitute, impious and disloyal, profane and ungodly, so falling off and perishing, failing and passing away, disappearing, losing and becoming invalidated from your own individual foundation and firmness, position and security, safety and fixed support, steadfastness and perseverance and stability, establishment and sustainment. On the other hand, continuously grow and increase, be amplified and magnified in, by and with the grace and joy, delight and thanks, favour and charm, goodwill and sweetness, pleasure, mercy and loving kindness, and knowledge, perception and discernment, intellectual understanding and insight of our Sovereign Master*, and our Deliverer and Preserver, Protector, Saviour and Rescuer, Yahushua* the Anointed Messiah*. To Him be the glory and splendour, magnificence and excellence, pre-eminence and dignity, brightness, grace and majesty both now, at this present time, and to the day and time, age and season of eternity. Yes, truly this is a firm and reliable statement of truth

Some in the christian community are using this as a basis of considering Paul's writings scripture. Especially when he says:

"just as, like and similar to their customary way they do to the rest of the remaining writings of Scripture"
Offline James  
#128 Posted : Friday, February 5, 2010 6:28:24 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)
Marcus, while I'm not a Greek shoaler, and if Swalchy tells me this is wrong I will defer to him, but as I understand it the word translated Scripture here is grapho, which is the Greek word for writings in general. It is used to describe Scripture many times, but other times it simply means writing. I believe the context dictates the proper translation, in this case Peter is speaking of Paul's letters as being difficult to understand, and comprehend, in light of Psalm 19:7, as well as other places, it is hard to think that Peter would be saying that Scripture is difficult to understand and comprehend. Where as if the word is translated writings, he would be saying that Paul's other writings are also hard to understand and comprehend.
I could be wrong, but I believe that, that is Yada's argument. I would be interested in hearing Swalchy's thoughts on it however, I know practically no Greek.

wrote:
“Yahuweh’s (YaHuWeH’s) Towrah (towrah – law and prescriptions for living) is complete and entirely perfect (tamym – without defect, lacking nothing, correct, sound, genuine, right, helpful, healthful, beneficial, and true), returning, restoring, and transforming (suwb – turning around) the soul (nepesh – consciousness). Yahuweh’s testimony is trustworthy and reliable (‘aman – verifiable, confirming, supportive, and establishing), making understanding and obtaining wisdom (hakam – educating and enlightening oneself to the point of comprehension) simple for the open-minded.” (Psalm 19:7)
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 RidesWithYah  
#129 Posted : Friday, February 5, 2010 2:38:23 PM(UTC)
RidesWithYah
Joined: 6/10/2008(UTC)
Posts: 331

It's difficult to discuss with those who read one verse and stop.
If they would continue to the very next verse, verse 17, they would see:

Quote:
17Therefore, dear friends, since you already know this, be on your guard so that you may not be carried away by the error of lawless men and fall from your secure position.


lawless, like, WITHOUT TORAH.
Offline Yada  
#130 Posted : Friday, February 5, 2010 3:32:52 PM(UTC)
Yada
Joined: 6/28/2007(UTC)
Posts: 3,537

As I read through the new material, I came across this citation. Yada wrote:

Quote:
Yahweh said that the crime of diminishing the use of His name was punishable by death and separation (in Leviticus 24:9-16), whereas the Rabbis said that the use of Yahweh’s name was a crime punishable by death. It is why Rabbis replaced Yahweh’s name with "Lord," under the guise that it was "too sacred to say."


Yet, when I looked up the passage, it didn't seem to clearly convey this:

Quote:
Leviticus 24:9-16 (New Living Translation)

9 The loaves of bread will belong to Aaron and his descendants, who must eat them in a sacred place, for they are most holy. It is the permanent right of the priests to claim this portion of the special gifts presented to the Lord.”

An Example of Just Punishment

10 One day a man who had an Israelite mother and an Egyptian father came out of his tent and got into a fight with one of the Israelite men. 11 During the fight, this son of an Israelite woman blasphemed the Name of the Lord[a] with a curse. So the man was brought to Moses for judgment. His mother was Shelomith, the daughter of Dibri of the tribe of Dan. 12 They kept the man in custody until the Lord’s will in the matter should become clear to them. 13 Then the Lord said to Moses, 14 “Take the blasphemer outside the camp, and tell all those who heard the curse to lay their hands on his head. Then let the entire community stone him to death. 15 Say to the people of Israel: Those who curse their God will be punished for their sin. 16 Anyone who blasphemes the Name of the Lord must be stoned to death by the whole community of Israel. Any native-born Israelite or foreigner among you who blasphemes the Name of the Lord must be put to death.


Can anyone shed some light on exactly what this "blasphemy" of the Name was?

Thanks.
If you'd like to join the YY Study Group room on Paltalk - just click here. The lockword is: yadayahweh
You can download the free software here.
Hope to see everyone on Paltalk!
WARNING: Do not give out personal information (name, address, etc.) to anyone on Paltalk - ever!
Offline Swalchy  
#131 Posted : Saturday, February 6, 2010 12:20:55 AM(UTC)
Swalchy
Joined: 7/4/2007(UTC)
Posts: 250
Man
Location: England

James wrote:
Marcus, while I'm not a Greek scholar, and if Swalchy tells me this is wrong I will defer to him, but as I understand it the word translated Scripture here is grapho, which is the Greek word for writings in general. It is used to describe Scripture many times, but other times it simply means writing.


Grapho/γραφω would be the Greek verb meaning "to write, inscribe, compose, note down." The word here in 2 Peter 3:16 is the feminine noun graphe/γραφη meaning "writing, composition, Scripture, inscription, written characters". The noun graphe/γραφη does indeed come from grapho/γραφω however :)

The most confusing thing about 2 Peter 3:16 is the word used that I've translated as "the rest of the remaining", a translation of the Greek λοιπος/loipos meaning "the rest, remaining". As Yada mentions, if Peter had want to say "other Scriptures" (the way most English translations 'translate' λοιπος/loipos), there are two other viable Greek words to indicate "other": αλλος/allos which means "another/different thing of the same kind" (eg., a red rose is different to a white rose, but they are both roses), or ετερος/heteros which means "another/different thing of a separate kind" (eg., a lion is different to a human, for a lion is a feline and the man is a homo-sapien). Neither of these are used, so "other" isn't being used in this sentence at all.

So, "the rest of the remaining writings of Scripture" would probably be translated more accurately as "the rest of the actual writings of Scripture" to make the distinction between the non-Scripture Pauline letters compared to the TP&P.

Quote:
I believe the context dictates the proper translation, in this case Peter is speaking of Paul's letters as being difficult to understand, and comprehend, in light of Psalm 19:7, as well as other places, it is hard to think that Peter would be saying that Scripture is difficult to understand and comprehend.


I'm 99.999999% confident that the "the same way they do" isn't in reference to the "hard to understand" section of the statement, but to the "which the unlearned and unstable twist ... to their own destruction".

Peter's point isn't that the TP&P are hard to understand, but that unlearned and unsteady people twist and distort the message contained in the TP&P to their own destruction :)

Either way, there is nothing in 2 Peter 2:15-16 that even remotely refers to Paul's writings as "inspired Scripture". That would only be Christian twisting and distortion of the Apostle Peter's words :)
Offline James  
#132 Posted : Saturday, February 6, 2010 7:20:20 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)
Yada the Hebrew word that is translated Blasphemy here is naqab, Yada does a good job of discussing in the context of the Lev. verse in the Shav' Chapter.

Originally Posted by: Shav' Go to Quoted Post
According to God, doing these things is a sin. He said so in Leviticus: "Speak to the children of Israel, saying: ‘Whoever curses (qalal) his God shall bear his sin. And whoever blasphemes (naqab) the name of Yahuweh shall surely be put to death. All the congregation shall stone him, the stranger as well as him who is born in the land. When he blasphemes (naqab) the name of Yahuweh, he shall be put to death." (Leviticus 24:15-16) Yahuweh is being very specific here. Anyone who speaks lightly of God (Hebrew Elohim, the general designation for deity), anyone who would make God an insignificant part of his or her life or diminish Him in their minds, has sinned and will face the consequence of their error. By refusing to take God seriously, they "shall bear (literally lift or carry) their chet, crimes or offenses."
Blasphemy (naqab), however, is an extremely grave offense, an unforgivable act that leads directly to death. Naqab, means: "to violently pierce a person’s hand, to strike them through and cause pain" which is precisely what the Jews did to their Messiah. Naqab also means "to libel or slander," and thus when used in reference to Yahuweh, naqab is equivalent to shaw - meaning the preaching or advocacy of false teaching, politics, or religion concerning God. Being religious in opposition to Yahweh - libeling Him in writing or slandering Him verbally, is seen as an act of extreme violence that leads to death.
This penalty was to be carried out by "the congregation," that is, the children of Israel in their theocratic assembly. The instructions were delivered to Yisra’el at the time and place of revelation. So don’t get carried away. While Yahuweh will enforce His death penalty on those who substituted Constantine’s religion for Yahushua’s relationship, those who etched His name out of His Scriptures and relaced it with Baal’s, and those who replaced His perscriptions with the laws those found in the Talmud and Catachisms, we are not to stone such false teachers. Instead, we can kill the message and crucify the messenger by exposing and repudiating them. We can shine the light of truth on the darkness of their deceptions.
But most importantly, the lesson is clear. The difference between qalal and naqab is that of spiritual indifference vs. false teaching. The first merely hurts us; the second kills all those around us - something Yahuweh cannot tolerate.
There is one more passage worthy of our consideration on this subject. "I am Yahuweh. You shall not profane (chalal - pierce, wound, cause to die, or defile, taint, besmirch, sully, tarnish, and corrupt) My Set Apart (qodesh) name." (Leviticus 22:31-32) Yahuweh’s name was pierced when Yahushua was nailed to the pole. It is defiled when it is replaced with LORD, and it is besmirched, sullied, tarnished and corrupted by the religious revisions of men. God does not want us to do those things.
Hosea concludes the 12th chapter on theme: "But by a prophet Yahuweh lifted up Yisra’el from Mitsrayim (the crucible and/or Egypt). And by a prophet he was kept safe, cared for and preserved. Ephraim has provoked to bitter sorrow and grieving, so the Master (‘adonay) will forsake (natash - reject, abandon, cease having a relationship with, desert, leave) him. His bloodguilt (dam - death) is on him. I will return his reproach (cherpah - contempt, scorn, insults, taunts, and slurs)." (Hosea 12:13-14)
Ephraim, representing ten of Yisra’el’s twelve tribes, had been rejected by Yahuweh for the crime of shaw’. It would lead to the spiritual death of the nation.


It is another example of where translations do not do a word justice.

Swalchy thanks for the elaboration on the 2 Peter verse.

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 Yada  
#133 Posted : Saturday, February 6, 2010 8:08:51 AM(UTC)
Yada
Joined: 6/28/2007(UTC)
Posts: 3,537

Thanks, James.
If you'd like to join the YY Study Group room on Paltalk - just click here. The lockword is: yadayahweh
You can download the free software here.
Hope to see everyone on Paltalk!
WARNING: Do not give out personal information (name, address, etc.) to anyone on Paltalk - ever!
Offline James  
#134 Posted : Saturday, February 6, 2010 11:33:14 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)
Yada wrote:
Thanks, James.

I aim to please.
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 RidesWithYah  
#135 Posted : Sunday, February 7, 2010 1:51:41 AM(UTC)
RidesWithYah
Joined: 6/10/2008(UTC)
Posts: 331

Quote:
I aim to please.


And you always seem to succeed.
So, thanks.
Offline James  
#136 Posted : Monday, February 8, 2010 6:44:44 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)
RidesWithYah wrote:
And you always seem to succeed.
So, thanks.

I do my best.
Thanks
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 Marcus  
#137 Posted : Thursday, February 18, 2010 3:00:06 AM(UTC)
Marcus
Joined: 9/8/2009(UTC)
Posts: 93
Location: NY

Has anyone come across this before http://www.justgivemethe...ommunication_of_paul.htm more importantly has anyone confirmed the validity of the claims.
Offline Mike  
#138 Posted : Thursday, February 18, 2010 7:48:28 AM(UTC)
Mike
Joined: 10/2/2007(UTC)
Posts: 534
Location: Texas

Thanks: 6 times
Was thanked: 21 time(s) in 13 post(s)
Marcus,

Good find. Another article on that website is titled "The Problem with Paul" by C.M. which was interesting.
Link
http://www.justgivemethetruth.com/problem.htm

Offline James  
#139 Posted : Thursday, February 18, 2010 9:13:45 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'm trying to find a book to verify the claims in that article Marcus, if it is true, it will make a great addition to QP.

Mike, i read that article earlier today, I think it does a really good job as well of debunking Paul.
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 In His Name  
#140 Posted : Thursday, February 18, 2010 1:18:04 PM(UTC)
In His Name
Joined: 9/7/2008(UTC)
Posts: 550

Was thanked: 1 time(s) in 1 post(s)
Jesus Words Only puts this together nicely. The Ebionites (The Poor) lead by Zaddik ((the Just One) aka James the Just) are postulated as being the writers or preservers of the DSS. The chapter LINK IS HERE and a taste of the writing below:
From Jesus Words Only:
Quote:
A Fortuitous Discovery of Ebionite Writings?

Or is that all that we now have from the Ebionites? Did the world recently discover a treasure trove of their writings from which we can objectively measure their orthodoxy? A good argument has been recently made by Professor Eisenman in James: The Brother of Jesus that we have recovered some of the Ebionites’ writings among the Dead Sea Scrolls. How so? Many of the sectarian works at the Dead Sea are written by a group who in Hebrew call themselves the Ebyonim or Ebion—The Poor. They even describe themselves as the “Congregation of the Poor.”4 The Poor of the Dead Sea Scrolls (DSS) claimed to be followers of “The Way,” part of “The New Covenant” who found the “Messiah” who is called the “Prince of the Congregation” and “Teacher of Righteousness.” He is gone, killed at the urging of the priests at Jerusalem. After the departure of the Messiah (who will return), the temporal leader who led the Poor was called the Just One, i.e., Zaddik in Hebrew. Furthermore, their leader—the Zaddik—is in a struggle against the “Spouter of Lies” who seeks to seduce the New Covenant community from following the Law of Moses. The Poor (Ebion) reject the idea Habakkuk 2:4 means justification is by faith and insist its meaning is “justification by faithfulness.” The DSS Ebion have two works called “Justification by Works” which reaffirm their rejection of the position of the “Spouter of Lies.”

When we compare the Ebion of the Dead Sea Scrolls to what Eusebius describes as the Ebionites, the similarities are striking. The Christian sect of Ebionites seem to match the writings of the Poor (Ebyonim, Ebion) whose writings were found at the Dead Sea site of Qumram. These Dead Sea Scrolls (DSS) reflect ideas and thoughts that are unmistakably Christian.5 The question is whether the writings of The Poor found at Qumram pre-date or post-date Christ.

Unfortunately, this cannot be done by carbon dating the papers found at the Dead Sea. Such dates only tell us the date of the age of the paper. Carbon dating can not tell us the date of the writing on the paper. Yet, we have other reliable means to identify the date of the activity of the people whose writings were preserved at Qumram. Fifty-seven to sixty-nine percent of all the coins in the Dead Sea caves are from the period 44-69 A.D.—part of the Christian era. Thus, the only way to know whether Christians or non-Christians wrote these writings is to study the words on the pages of the DSS. Professor Eisenman finds significant proof the Dead Sea Ebyonim is a Christian group. For example, in the DSS, the temporal ruler of the Ebion who succeeds the killed Messiah (who will return) is called the Zaddik. Numerous ancient sources outside the DSS identify James the Just (the brother of Jesus) as The Zaddik. Translated, this means Just One. Jerome by the 400s will call him James the Just. In Christian writings of that era, the name of James was rarely used. He was merely called the Zaddik or Just One.6 As we saw previously, James—the Zaddik—was the first bishop of Jerusalem after Jesus’ resurrection.7 So is it then mere coincidence that the head of the Ebion of the Dead Sea Scrolls is called the Zaddik? Of course not. Professor Eisenman appears to have stumbled upon a major discovery.

If Professor Eisenman is correct, this means the Ebionites in Eusebius’ writings are the Jerusalem Church under James. What Professor Eisenman then notes to corroborate this idea is that Paul refers twice to sending money to the poor at Jerusalem. Eisenman says this just as easily could be The Poor. (Rom. 15:26; Gal. 2:9-10.) If we translate back Paul’s words into Hebrew, he was saying The Ebion of Jerusalem was the name of the church under James. They were the Congregation of the Poor, just like we might call a church The Lighthouse Church. We do not see Paul’s intent due to case size in the standard text which changes The Poor into the poor.8

What heightens the probability Professor Eisenman is correct is recent archaeology. The initial hypothesis was that the DSS were exclusively the writings of an Essene sect from the 200 B.C. era. This idea recently crumbled in 2004. Golb’s contrary hypothesis that the DSS came from the Temple at Jerusalem between 65-70 A.D. has now been strongly confirmed by extensive archaeological digs under auspices of Israeli universities. These digs proved there was no community site of monks at Qumram. It was a clay plate factory. The initial inference of a large community of monks from the presence of a large number of plates misinterpreted the evidence. Second, we can now infer the scrolls were hidden in the mountains to protect the scrolls, and not because a large community had been involved in copying activity. In fact, archaeology now proves there was no copy center or Scriptorum, as originally claimed. None of the metal clips copyists use to guide copying were found at Qumram. A few ordinary pens and numerous coins were found. Yet, no metal clips of copyists. Not even a fragment of one! The very nature of the scrolls likewise demonstrate that no monkish community was engaged in copying them. The Dead Sea Scrolls, it turns out, are not only an eclectic collection of sectarian materials but also a cache with numerous copies of the Bible texts. This is just what one would expect to find from the Temple Library at Jerusalem had it been secreted away in advance of the Roman troops seiging Jerusalem prior to 70 A.D. The Essenes would not be expected, by contrast, to preserve several opposing strains of sectarian writings. One such strain is the writings of The Poor—The Ebion. On the other hand, we would expect to find Jewish Rabbis at Jerusalem wanting to keep copies of Christian writings for informational purposes at the Library of the Temple of Jerusalem. We would expect to find records of sectarian differences maintained by such a library. Golb’s argument has now essentially been vindicated. Golb made a scholarly case that the DSS are writings that were taken from the Temple at Jerusalem during the years of the Roman siege that finally prevailed in 70 A.D. Hiding them in these caves preserved them from the torches which in the end destroyed the Temple in 70 A.D. after a long siege.9 Thus, recent archaeological discoveries at Qumram establish that many of the documents can be potentially prepared in the Christian-era. We no longer are forced to disregard the Christian character of certain writings merely because of the Essene hypothesis which strangled DSS studies until now. Among the newer writings in the DSS, we find some in Hebrew written by a group calling itself The Poor—The Ebion. This transliterates very well as The Ebionites.10
“Because he clings to Me, is joined to Me, loves and delights in Me, desires Me, therefore I will deliver him, carry him safely away, cause him to escape from harm making him inaccessible and strong, and delivering him safely to heaven, because he has known, observed, cared for, recognized, instructed and advised others to use, designated, acknowledged, discerned, answered in, My name, authority, character, report, mark, and nature." Psalm 91:14
Offline Marcus  
#141 Posted : Friday, February 19, 2010 4:19:18 AM(UTC)
Marcus
Joined: 9/8/2009(UTC)
Posts: 93
Location: NY

Offline edStueart  
#142 Posted : Friday, February 19, 2010 8:32:19 AM(UTC)
edStueart
Joined: 10/29/2008(UTC)
Posts: 370
Location: Philadelphia

James wrote:
I think it does a really good job as well of debunking Paul.


It is a pretty good article. The author does in 6,000 words what Yada does in half-a-million words!
"You shall know the truth, and the truth shall set you free."
But first, it will piss you off!
Offline James  
#143 Posted : Saturday, February 20, 2010 7:20:33 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)
edStueart wrote:
It is a pretty good article. The author does in 6,000 words what Yada does in half-a-million words!

Yeah, but Yada is a lot more in depth. Also a part of the job of QP is to show the horrid inaccuracy of English translations, and that cause it to become a bit longer.
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 RidesWithYah  
#144 Posted : Saturday, February 20, 2010 7:43:58 AM(UTC)
RidesWithYah
Joined: 6/10/2008(UTC)
Posts: 331

Based heavily on what I learned here and JWO, here's a compilation I put together.
(WARNING: NIV Ahead!)

File Attachment(s):
Paul final booklet format 23jan10 rearrange.doc (150kb) downloaded 26 time(s).
Offline danshelper  
#145 Posted : Monday, February 22, 2010 4:47:14 AM(UTC)
danshelper
Joined: 11/30/2009(UTC)
Posts: 196
Location: Gettysburg, PA

RidesWithYah,
I've briefly read your booklet and am very thankful for this resource. In the things I've been trying to absorb - Yada's QP, JWO, these other resources mentioned here (just give me the truth) - it gets overwhelming. There is such a tremendous need for succinct information! I often feel I need a "diminished version" of Yada's writings. Anyway, your booklet clearly points out the relationship between Paul and Balaam and the interesting point about the tribe of Benjamin. I need this type of resource as "beginner" information for Christian family and friends who are comfortable with the NIV - and as a kind of a "hook" to snatch them out of the fog of mainstream Christian teaching/thinking. Thanks to all here who are continuing to provide great resources/links and share your scholarship.
Offline RidesWithYah  
#146 Posted : Monday, February 22, 2010 12:52:28 PM(UTC)
RidesWithYah
Joined: 6/10/2008(UTC)
Posts: 331

Glad you found it helpful, Dan, thanks for the encouraging words.

I've really struggled with whether to use the NIV -- it's so familiar to so many, it seems to help to persuade people from their "own" scriptures.
Arguing name corrections and translation errors gets things off track so easily.
On the other hand, I don't want to perpetuate the substitutions and corruptions of His name.
So which is the lesser of two evils?
I don't think one answer fits all situations, so I try to make both resources available.

Some have suggested putting a corrected text parallel with the NIV, and I think that's a good idea;
I'm just struggling with how to do that and keep it "succinct".

In His Love,
RWY.
Offline RidesWithYah  
#147 Posted : Monday, February 22, 2010 2:26:23 PM(UTC)
RidesWithYah
Joined: 6/10/2008(UTC)
Posts: 331

Another thought I've thought:

We typically think (or are taught) that all of the early "church" stuff happened kind of all at once; or that the Gospels were written first, then Paul came along and clarified, corrected, and "fixed" what they wrote; establishing the "true" gospel for the "church age". BUT -- almost every credible source I find (and the catholic church, too) dates John's writings, including his letters (1,2,3 John), his "gospel" (John), and the Revelation as much later, 85-95 AD. (John died around 96 AD, Paul was beheaded ~68AD). So from John's vantage point, writing 50-60 years after the resurrection, and 20-30 years after Paul's letters, he had every opportunity to affirm Paul's version as the "true" gospel. He doesn't. He affirms Yahshua's message for salvation (John 15:1-17), calls those who teach against Yah's commandments liars (1 John 2:1-8) and antichrist (2 John 1:5-11). And of course, the points in Revelation pointed directly at Paul already discussed.

John's gospel talks about Yahshua's actions on the Sabbath (Chapters 5, 7, 9); and gives us confirmation that the annual sabbath (Unleavened Bread) was a "high Sabbath", meaning it fell on the 7th day Sabbath, in the year he was crucified, fixing the date at 33AD (John 19:31).

Yah had a reason for letting one live to an old age, although the rest of the apostles gave their lives to prove that what they said was true.

Hallelu-Yah!
Offline Swalchy  
#148 Posted : Monday, February 22, 2010 11:47:11 PM(UTC)
Swalchy
Joined: 7/4/2007(UTC)
Posts: 250
Man
Location: England

Sorry to burst the bubble of the JWO followers, and those who have been persuaded by the picking and choosing that the author of JWO has done of Eisenman's work, but the Carbon dating (which, contrary to the author of JWO, can be done on the animal skins that the DSS were written on to an accurate dating - where does he get the term "papers" from?) has shown that the manuscripts that Eisenman wanted to be from the 1st Century CE, are actually from between the 2nd-1st century BCE. Hence why Eisenman doesn't quote the findings in the book that the author of JWO refers to: The Dead Sea Scrolls Uncovered. Source 1. Source 2. Source 3 (go to page 137 for this one).

Also, the author of JWO hasn't been honest in pointing out what else Eisenman says concerning the "Ebion" of the "Dead Sea".

According to Eisenman, as noted throughout his book The Dead Sea Scrolls Uncovered, "Jesus" was actually a leader of the Zealot Jewish Sect, and after he died his brother James took over the mantel. He also claims that as the leader of the Zealots, James was the one who instigated the attack against the Romans in 66CE that eventually resulted in the Romans destroying the Temple as prophesied by "Jesus".

According to Eisenman's description of the "Ebion" at Qumran, they were in fact a Militant, Xenophobic, Anti-Foreigner, vindictive, and aggressively hostile Jewish Sect who were elitist in that they were the "true Israel" and Gentiles were not welcome.

In case you hadn't noticed, this isn't an, as the author of JWO would have us believe, a "striking similarity" between the "Ebion" of Qumran and Eusebius' description of the Ebionites (which the author of JWO doesn't even quote at all, btw. Well if he does, it's no where near whereh he's talking about it). Eusebius' description of the Ebionites can be found here, Chapter 27.

The "pick and choose" way of the author of JWO is getting to be extremely irritating, and I am surprised that no one here appears to have even attempted to confirm whether what the author of JWO says is true. It took me less than an hour to prove that he wasn't in this regard, and also show that he is a deceiver who isn't giving his readers the full picture of those "scholars" he refers to.
Offline In His Name  
#149 Posted : Tuesday, February 23, 2010 7:14:11 AM(UTC)
In His Name
Joined: 9/7/2008(UTC)
Posts: 550

Was thanked: 1 time(s) in 1 post(s)
Swalchy wrote:
and I am surprised that no one here appears to have even attempted to confirm whether what the author of JWO says is true. It took me less than an hour to prove that he wasn't in this regard, and also show that he is a deceiver who isn't giving his readers the full picture of those "scholars" he refers to

Swalchy, I stand guilty of offering this text without subjecting it to a scholarly vetting. In my defense, I did not understand that to be the standard for this site, I offered it to stimulate the discussion at hand. To hold this theory (JWO) or any other theory, as truth is dangerous. As soon as we accept any theory as truth, we close our minds to new ideas. I sense this attitude in the sources you provide.

And even with your rebuttal, I still do not see how JWO has been destroyed.

JWO said it was not possible to carbon date the ink. I agree this is a specious argument since it is unlikely they would use 200 year old hides to write on. But the source you provide states that only 8 DSS documents were tested and did not indicate if any of these were the later documents in question. That some of the documents were older is in keeping with the JWO theory of Qumran being a hiding place for the documents, not a scribal community.

Is it wrong to take a piece of a theory out of the whole (as JWO took pieces of Eisenman) and use it elsewhere? I remember Yada saying that he has used an authors research for the facts he provides, even though the authors conclusions are wrong. It seems to me that JWO has taken 'facts' from various sources and built them into a compelling argument.

Swalchy, I recognize your superior background in this matter, please help me understand your issues with JWO.


“Because he clings to Me, is joined to Me, loves and delights in Me, desires Me, therefore I will deliver him, carry him safely away, cause him to escape from harm making him inaccessible and strong, and delivering him safely to heaven, because he has known, observed, cared for, recognized, instructed and advised others to use, designated, acknowledged, discerned, answered in, My name, authority, character, report, mark, and nature." Psalm 91:14
Offline edStueart  
#150 Posted : Tuesday, February 23, 2010 8:00:28 AM(UTC)
edStueart
Joined: 10/29/2008(UTC)
Posts: 370
Location: Philadelphia

Swalchy wrote:
Sorry to burst the bubble of the JWO followers


Who is JWO?

Sorry, I lost track of the meaning of this TLA.

(Three Letter Acronym)
"You shall know the truth, and the truth shall set you free."
But first, it will piss you off!
Users browsing this topic
5 Pages<12345>
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.