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

Notification

Icon
Error

4 Pages<1234>
Options
View
Go to last post Go to first unread
Offline James  
#51 Posted : Thursday, May 8, 2014 3:08:54 AM(UTC)
James
Joined: 10/23/2007(UTC)
Posts: 2,608
Man
Location: Texas

Thanks: 5 times
Was thanked: 208 time(s) in 146 post(s)
C wrote:
Hi Yada,
I've been reading Yada Yah and Intro to God, whenever I get time.
I already told you that I never liked Paul, starting 20 years ago when I was first filled with the Spirit.
But, I want to know why you think that God doesn't hear or answer the prayers of ANYone, until they start to follow Towrah...or observe the called out meetings of Yahowah?
He has spoken to me many, many, times in the 20 years I've been born again. He's answered more prayers than I can count. I've seen the same in many other believers I know. These are individuals who are "Christians" and don't follow the Feasts, and they still believe in Paul as inspired.
So, when it's obvious that God does hear their prayers and does move in their lives....then why do you say He doesn't?
I am still reading and actually enjoying the amplified version (via the Hebrew) that you have done in your online books. It has shown me much more than I've ever known.
I'm just having a problem reconciling some of the statements regarding people who are "Christians".
I agree wholeheartedly that Christendom is full of pagan rituals and traditions of men.
I agree that Paul was used by the enemy to hijack the true message. But, I have seen much evidence of Yahowah's love and care for people who don't understand any of what you do.
I've seen changed lives (for the better) and Him moving to restore, uplift, help, and reconcile these individuals to Himself.
I also have used the name "Jesus" to cast out demons (long stories there). It worked just fine. I've seen the power of praise and worship, in combating the enemy, as well.
I've had the Spirit wake me up in the middle of the night, to pray. When I didn't know what to pray or who I was praying for, I still knew I needed to pray. The weight to pray was heavy on me, but no words could be found. A language came from my mouth (tongues, I guess) and it wasn't me doing it. My mind was separate from what was coming forth from my Spirit. But, I knew, that I knew, that the Spirit was praying through me, and after several hours, I finally had peace inside that my praying was done, and I went back to sleep.
The next day, I found out that a certain person I'd already been sharing God with and trying to minister to, was arrested. It was the exact time that God woke me up to pray.
There are numerous other occasions of God moving like that, in my life, before I ever started this search to understand Towrah or the Feasts. Some of these things were before I belonged to a church....some after. I will say I had much more intimacy with Him when NOT in a church, than when in one. I no longer am involved in an organized church now.
Yahowshua said we would "know them by their fruits". I see good fruit in those who may not understand all of what you have dug out of the Towrah. I see people who truly WANT to follow Yahowshua and Yahowah..even when they call them "Lord" and "Jesus".
I guess you would have to know the people I do. To look at these individuals, and have the audacity to say, "you don't truly know God, and He isn't moving in your life like you think", is the height of arrogance to me.
God reached down into my life, lifted me up, embraced me, and held onto me, even when I wasn't holding on to Him very good. He has been with me over 20 years. I've only started studying Towrah the past few months.
He is obviously doing the same in others lives. Even others who don't understand all that you do.
Another thing is, there IS a Holy Fear of YHWH. What about Isaiah who said he was "undone" when seeing the glory of Yahowah? He realized he was a man of unclean lips, amongst a people of unclean lips. I even looked up the Hebrew meaning of those words, and they mean what they say.
I've experienced that awe and feeling of being undone. When I was first filled with the "Set Apart Spirit", I didn't even know what it was. I wasn't in any church. I was told later it was the Holy Spirit. But, for 3 weeks, all I wanted to do was be on my face before Him. It was overwhelming. But, it was good. I was "undone", the same as Isaiah. But, I felt totally loved and totally forgiven. If you knew my background and what He delivered me from, you would understand.
I would like to hear how you went from wherever you used to be, to doing the research you've done. If you would be so kind to share. It helps me to understand an individual by hearing their story. Maybe you don't share that with others.
I guess you could say I am "wrestling" with what I am reading and with what I've experienced.
I will probably come to new awareness and understanding, as I continue on.
If you have time to respond, that would be great.
Thanks,
C


Yada wrote:
C,

We have been through this, and nothing has changed. I'm telling you what he told us. He said that the prayers of the Towrahless were an abomination to Him. He told us that those who are without the Towrah are unknown to Him.

People are prone to projecting. They are prone to ascribing. Belief systems are highly misleading and intoxicating. But they are not true. Muslims believe sufficiently to die terrorizing others. Islam is not true.

So if confronted with your testimony and Yah's, I'm going to chose God's when they are in conflict. God does not speak in tongues. That's Pauline rubbish. Yahowsha's name isn't Jesus. We have already been over this. The facts are not going to change.

C, you can believe whatever you want, but I'm not interested in your beliefs. My advice is to continue to listen to Yahowah and to walk away from all association with Christianity. They are not compatible.

This letter was way too much about you, C, and far too little about Yahowah for me to read past the halfway point. If you want to try again without your feelings and experiences cluttering and begging the question, then let me know if you have a question that can be answered with Yahowah's testimony. But if not, if you are going to oppose His position, I'd rather listen to Yah by searching His Word than listen to you recount your experiences.

While that may sound harsh to you, it isn't. It has nothing to do with you. It's a choice. Yahowah has asked us to walk away from religion and I'm doing so. He asked us to trust and rely on Him, and excludes anything that is in conflict with Him.

Listen to God, not to yourself.

Yada
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  
#52 Posted : Friday, May 9, 2014 3:19:29 AM(UTC)
James
Joined: 10/23/2007(UTC)
Posts: 2,608
Man
Location: Texas

Thanks: 5 times
Was thanked: 208 time(s) in 146 post(s)
R wrote:
Hi Yada,
My name is R, I live in Australia, I've been listening to your show over the last few days on YouTube, I stumbled on it because I've become interested in discovering translational errors in the English bible. After hearing what you had to say I went ahead and found your website and I am extremely impressed with the knowledge you present on it. A lot of it makes total sense to me but I do have a few questions for you if you don't mind helping me understand...Just from listening to your show it is clear that you believe in a devil. Why is that? Is there anything in the Torah to back that up? I find it confusing that you have such a magnificent and profound understanding of the Torah yet still carry a belief of a devil? It would seem to me that the devil is nothing more then the personification of mans sinful nature and adverse character by religious organisations into a powerful "fallen angel" diety to remove the blame of sin from man onto a devil? Does not scripture teach that the angels are immortal and stare apon the face of Yahowah who also cannot be approached by sin? That being said how can an angel decide to oppose Yahowah? I'm interested to hear your opinion on this matter because I agree with a lot of what you have to say but this one thing really has me stumped?
Looking forward to hearing from you brother.
R


Yada wrote:
R,

Devil is a Greek term. Yahowah uses ha satan - the adversary. He is represented by name as Heylel ben Shechar - Arrogant Son of the Rising Sun, by the title Ba'al, meaning Lord, and symbolically as either a serpent or beast. Since he is discussed throughout the Torah, Prophets, and Psalms, I'm puzzled as to why you are questioning the Adversary's existence.

I don't have beliefs, but I try to go where the words lead. This unsavory character is introduced early in Bare'syth when he is allowed to enter the Garden. He is one of the central characters in the only book written before the Torah, Yowb - Job, and is named and described in Yasha'yah - Isaiah 14. He is the power behind the Beasts in Dany'el 7-9 as well. And to the degree that Revelation is reliable, Yahowsha' speaks of him and his association with Babylon.

There are mal'ak, but no angels. These spiritual messengers do not have freewill, but they are immortal. The lack of freewill does not preclude ego or rebellion, but simply makes arrogance and rebellion costly - just as it is in the military.

Yada
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  
#53 Posted : Friday, May 16, 2014 3:00:06 AM(UTC)
James
Joined: 10/23/2007(UTC)
Posts: 2,608
Man
Location: Texas

Thanks: 5 times
Was thanked: 208 time(s) in 146 post(s)
C wrote:
Hey Yada how have you been? Again I’d like to thank you for all the hard work you do. The problem is it is becoming more difficult to partake in it. For example I cannot see anything past the first page to introtogod.org as the little spinning wheel just goes around and around. I have to go through obscure links to see prophetofdoom. Other websites by others who may be against the establishment and try to rely on reason and logic are also having difficulties. Are there internal issues with your sites or is this them being attacked the way you said they would by the Godless New World Order types. I will continue to follow Shatteringmyths when I can but would like to get some of the text from Introtogod again. Thank you for your time. C


Yada wrote:
C,

The sites are constantly under attack, especially POD - and they are all interconnected. A good friend is trying to resolve the problem and may be able to do so shortly. At the ITG, since we are going to abandon Scribd, there is no reason to keep it working while he re-engineers the websites. We are hoping to return to HTML with PDF options.

Yada
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  
#54 Posted : Tuesday, May 20, 2014 3:03:06 AM(UTC)
James
Joined: 10/23/2007(UTC)
Posts: 2,608
Man
Location: Texas

Thanks: 5 times
Was thanked: 208 time(s) in 146 post(s)
RL wrote:
Yada Ive been listening to your shows, youtube video's & old blogtalk radio shows ect every day for about the last 4 months. Ive been seriously seeking truth for the last 8 years not very long I know so Im somewhat of a newbe. Please don't take my lack of info personal Im still very much a victim of this fractional reserve system leaving me limited time to read and study but Im almost ready to start working from home soon leaving me more time to study ect. I have a couple questions that have been driving me mad I know your a busy man with a full work load I would really like a chance to talk to you over the phone and would be willing to pay for your time if that were possible you can give me a ring anytime @ xxx-xxx-xxxx in the mean time maybe i can get a couple of these off my mind.

Question #1 How do we separate ourselves from the rule of this government were under if thats what Ya wants for us?

#2 Why do you use the word God/Gad so much if the word also has pagan origins? Why not refer to Him by His real name or most high, creator ect?

#3 Have you ever studied the book of Enoch in its original forms like the fragments found in the dead sea scrolls?

I have little computer or typing skills working on that one also so pardon the punctuation Me and my wife C have been studying the Hebrew language ancient and modern we hope to visit Israel this year if possible I would love to have the ability to read the fragments myself.
RL
Toda(Thanks)
Shalom


Yada wrote:
RL,

It is good to hear from you.

I've explained the use of the word God many times during the shows and many times in the books www.IntroToGod.org and www.YadaYah.com. 'Elohym is just a word, not a name, so it should be translated. Since it isn't a name, there is no reason to transliterate it. The most appropriate translation into English is god/God - which is also a common word and not a name. As a word, and not a name it does not pertain to the teaching that we should not promote the "names" of false gods. It is that simple. Translating 'eloyhm "mighty ones" or almighties is more likely going to confuse than inform. Moreover, Yahowah uses 'el and 'elohym to describe false gods, and since there is a pagan god named 'El, Yahowah isn't breaking His own instruction by using it. All we should therefore be concerned about is using Yahowah and not promoting any other name for any other god as being acceptable. We ought not call Him Jesus, Christ, or Allah, for example.

The book of Enoch isn't inspired. It is a fraud. Enoch didn't write it. It was compiled in the 2nd century BCE. There is no prophecy in it. Much of it contradicts Yahowah's testimony. There are many uninspired Qumran texts.

Based upon these two questions I assume that you have been influenced along the way by someone who has a coniption fit over god, which is a rabbinical teaching, and by someone who wants to use Enoch to set different dates using a different calendar.

Yada
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  
#55 Posted : Tuesday, May 20, 2014 3:26:12 AM(UTC)
James
Joined: 10/23/2007(UTC)
Posts: 2,608
Man
Location: Texas

Thanks: 5 times
Was thanked: 208 time(s) in 146 post(s)
M wrote:
YadaYah,

I have attached a letter and study I wanted to discuss with you
regarding Shamar and Shama.

I also included my book.

I hope you have time to respond,

M


Yada wrote:
MG,

I scanned your attachment and don't see how I can be of any assistance or how we will ever agree. If you want to interpret shamar as "guard" that is your choice. But why guard a written text? Is someone trying to steal it? In guarding it, do you stand next to it ready to pounce on someone who wants to examine it? I am at a complete loss as to why you would accept or promote such an idea.

I've provided the reasons behind most every translation. Few words are explained more completely than shamar and shama'. You are free to disagree, but you aren't going to convince me with a long list of copy and paste translations. And since I've already devoted the time to compile three thousand pages of translated passages and commentary detailing my conclusions, what is another hundred pages going to accomplish? I've examined both words comprehensively and translated them thousands of times. I see no justification for changing shamar-observe to guard or shama'-listen to obey. Both options are completely opposed to Yahowah's role as our Father and Teacher.

The most specific presentation on observing the towrah is presented in the 119th Psalm. You'll find that review in Part 3 of the Teaching Volume of www.IntroToGod.org should you be interested.

As for your book, I make it a practice never to comment on other author's material, but in this case since you sent it to me for that reason, I'm going to make an exception. Your translations appear rather standard other than transliterating rather than translating 'elohym and not bothering to transliterate yhwh. So there is nothing to be gained by them. It appears by your failure to translate them, therefore, that you share an affinity for the Hebrew Roots Movement. I do not.

You claim to have seen visions and to have spoken in tongues of angels, not knowing that the language of the mal'ak is Hebrew. Then you cite Hebrews and Romans, not knowing that Paul was a false prophet, a false apostle, and completely opposed to the towrah you want to guard/obey. So we are in absolute disagreement on these issues. And should you want to know why I have rejected Paul, consider reading www.QuestioningPaul.com.

It strikes me that you are trying to mix pentecostal christianity with rabbinical judaism while tossing in a little of you along the way via the visions and tongues. That is a strikeout from the towrah's perspective.

If there is a point that you want to make that you think I've missed, or if you want to use evidence and reason to show where I've erred, that can be handled succinctly and isn't already addressed in YadaYah.com, IntroToGod.org, or QuestioningPaul.com, please convey the issue which concerns you the most in the body of another email without an attachment or book.

Yada


M wrote:
Nobody is suggesting guarding a written text. YHWH has asked us to guard His commands, right-rulings and precepts. The concept is obvious and written. He states we guard to do. That would be an action of obedience.

You obviously scanned what I sent you because 50% of my book is a condemnation of Paul as well as the parts you wrote, pages 388-464 and 475-480.

You also obviously scanned the paper on Shamar and Shama. It is not important that you wrote 3,000 pages Yada, it is important that you were accurate. You were not, and you are being defensive instead of checking out what I wrote. That is your choice.

The paragraph after quoting Hebrews, Romans and Corinthians I explain the reason for quoting them. I have not written a thing Paul wrote for 15 years. I consider them the epistles of a Satanic High Priest.

I also stated that I grew up in a evangelical church. Hence the reason for writing what happened to me 30 years ago.

I have read all your work. I am impressed as I stated. I listen to you daily as well.

I think you jumped rather hastily to some incorrect conclusions. That's too bad.

M


Yada wrote:
MG,

I didn't jump to any hasty or incorrect conclusions. I read enough to observe the errors in the letter and book that I commented upon.

The translations you copied and pasted say "guard my covenant," "guard the way of YHWH," "guard the Festival," "guard this word," and "guard this law." Most every rendering of shamar was invalid, even nonsensical, in the context of the statements Yahowah was making. Moreover, towrah does not mean "law." In fact, you know that. You stated it on page 14. So why cite a laundry list of passages when you know the translations are wrong?

The Scriptures that you have cited primarily replace names and then transliterate a few titles. I bought them early on hoping for the best but consistently found that their translations are as bad as any. In fact, from what I observed they made almost no attempt to improve the translations, focusing instead on inserting their interpretation of relevant names. Putting a correct name in the midst of an invalid translation is not particularly helpful. Similarly translating or transliterating everything except the most important thing - Yahowah's name is inexcusable. Moreover, The Scriptures include all of Paul's letters, which destroys their credibility. It's one thing to include them for reference, labeling them as false, but another to suggest that they were inspired - as they do while claiming inspiration.

Beyond this, if you want to teach others what Yahowah is teaching us, learn Hebrew. Don't rely on others.

Guard means to "watch over to protect and control." We are not asked to "protect or control" any of the things in the above list, including the covenant, the way, the festival, the word, or the tosrah. Some we are to respond to, some we are to read, some we are to study. Further the "watch over" aspect is only valid if interpreted "observe" as in "read." So your letter provides errant renderings of shamar and of towrah. If this is the concept you are promoting it is invalid. It misrepresents Yahowah's intent and nature. Please don't do that.

Next you quote renderings of shama' from The Scriptures as obey when the word means listen. Why would you do that? Are you opposed to freewill? Are you uncomfortable with Yah being our Father? Do you see Him as a Lord with Laws to be obeyed? And if so, why send me a long list of inaccurately translated passages? You know that I do not concur.

To listen does not mean to obey, no matter how many lexicons trying to justify existing publications claim that it does. Likewise, to keep does not mean to watch over. These are all convoluted religious justifications for errant translations. There are thousands of examples of lexicons presenting myths. They are flawed tools and should be used as such.

So, while you can't be free to obey and while you can't read something you are guarding without letting your guard down, if you want to believe that the Towah is a set of laws to be obeyed, then good luck obeying them. Many cannot be obeyed. So what then? But every word is educational and enlightening.

If your book is a condemnation of Paul, then why claim to speak in the tongues of angels? That is a Pauline myth. Why say immediately thereafter that "YHWH shared three scriptures with me that I called my commission," and then list Acts, Hebrews, and Romans, none of which are scripture and none of which Yahowah would ever share with anyone? Yahowah condemns Paul, He doesn't use him. Yahowah uses His Word - His Towrah, His Prophets, and HIs Psalms. They are sufficient. Do not add to them. Do not take away from them. If you want to communicate on His behalf, share them and explain them.

Next, you claim that you believe that you are a prophet. Good luck with that. Better not make a single mistake. Better learn to read, write, listen to, and comprehend, Hebrew. Better be careful. The test for a prophet is in Dabarym 13 and 18 and it is uncompromising. One mistake and you are dead. I'd strongly discourage you from making that claim. There is more than sufficient existing prophecy to be understood and shared to open our eyes. Yahowah has presented everything we need to know. Your book isn't going to be added among the existing prophets.

And unless I've misread your words, you're not off to a very good start with: "I believe today that the sword in my hand is my writing and the sword in my mouth is my speaking." Dowd said just the opposite. He wanted Yahowah's Word in his mouth, not his own. And I'm absolutely confident that Dowd was a prophet.

I mentioned the length of the books to say that I've been through all of this countless times, therefore, going over it again for you and adding another one hundred pages isn't going to be helpful. If you prefer The Scriptures translations we are going to agree to disagree.

I'm often wrong, but I'd risk my soul on the proper definition of shamar, shama', and towrah. And I'm absolutely certain that they are not guard, obey, or law.

Even your first quote references Yah as Teacher. Put the pieces together. Think it through. It isn't hard. It just takes a willingness to observe, closely examining and carefully considering the towrah teaching and guidance of Yahowah recognizing that He is the Father of the Covenant, and that everything He has to say is designed to educate and guide us so that we can choose to be part of His family.

You are correct in seeing Revelation 12-19 as an explanation of Dany'el 7-9. But Dany'el is a minor prophet compared to Yasha'yah or Yirmayah. There is very little teaching in the Dany'el prophecies compared to the other examples. And with Revelation, we only have a translation of what was said, not the Hebrew text of the conversation, so you have to be careful. In addition, we don't have a pre-Constantine manuscript of anything past chapter 17, leaving much of it subject of religious copyedits.

I began wanting to focus on prophecy, but everyone is better off if we focus instead on the Covenant Relationship and Yahowah's Towrah Teaching.

The Way is through the Miqra'ey. It's a lot more than Passover.

I had intended to spend this afternoon working through a new chapter on Rome as the Beast, but instead spent it writing you. I hope that I haven't invested my time poorly. I hope that you decide to learn Hebrew and then rewrite your book. If you do, it will be the most rewarding experience of your life.

Yada
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  
#56 Posted : Wednesday, May 21, 2014 2:50:04 AM(UTC)
James
Joined: 10/23/2007(UTC)
Posts: 2,608
Man
Location: Texas

Thanks: 5 times
Was thanked: 208 time(s) in 146 post(s)
PB wrote:
hi,
often I hear people use these verses to dispute the torah.
Mat 22:37-40.
they say only these two commandments stand.


Yada wrote:
PB,

He was asked "which statement in the Towrah is the greatest," so He answered by quoting the Towrah. How does answering that question by citing the Towrah dispute the Towrah? He then said that the entire Towrah was based upon the two statements that He cited from the Towrah. And indeed it is. The Towrah exists primarily so that we can come to know and love Yahowah, and secondarily so that we can learn to love one another.

So why is it that unthinking Christians believe that instead of affirming what He said in Mat 5-7, He was contradicting Himself? As with everything, we have to think to understand.

Yada
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  
#57 Posted : Wednesday, May 28, 2014 3:09:45 AM(UTC)
James
Joined: 10/23/2007(UTC)
Posts: 2,608
Man
Location: Texas

Thanks: 5 times
Was thanked: 208 time(s) in 146 post(s)
C wrote:
The faith of these persecuted believers is not in vain....Towrah or not.
To stand up for their faith under this type of persecution and evil, can only be attributed to a real faith in the One who strengthens them.
These people know God. Just like many other Christians do.




Nigerian Christians: Desperate And Losing Hope in Humanity – Breaking The Silence « VOICE OF THE PERSECUTED


Yada wrote:
This situation is so very sad, so I can appreciate your empathy. My heart cries for these girls. But false hope isn't helpful.

Faith in that which is not valid is of no value. It is false hope. It is courageous to stand up against persecution, I give you that. But millions have done so throughout time without any clue who God is. This is a case of the devotees of one religious lie tormenting the victims of another religious lie. It is one of many reasons Yahowah hates religion.

No Christian knows Yahowah. If they knew Yahowah, they wouldn't be Christians.

This is not my opinion. Read the conclusion to the Sermon on the Mount. Yahowsha' rejects everyone who is without the Towrah.

If you want to help them, join me in overtly exposing and condemning Islam. Then after they are free, expose and condemn Pauline Christianity while sharing the Towrah.

Yada


C wrote:
Yada wrote:
Faith in that which is not valid is of no value. It is false hope. It is courageous to stand up against persecution, I give you that. But millions have done so throughout time without any clue who God is. This is a case of the devotees of one religious lie tormenting the victims of another religious lie.


Mark 13:9-13
American Standard Version (ASV)
9 But take ye heed to yourselves: for they shall deliver you up to councils; and in synagogues shall ye be beaten; and before governors and kings shall ye stand for my sake, for a testimony unto them.

10 And the gospel must first be preached unto all the nations.

11 And when they lead you to judgment, and deliver you up, be not anxious beforehand what ye shall speak: but whatsoever shall be given you in that hour, that speak ye; for it is not ye that speak, but the Holy Spirit.

12 And brother shall deliver up brother to death, and the father his child; and children shall rise up against parents, and cause them to be put to death.

13 And ye shall be hated of all men for my name's sake: but he that endureth to the end, the same shall be saved.



Yada wrote:
No Christian knows Yahowah. If they knew Yahowah, they wouldn't be Christians.




Yahowsha said, "If you've seen Me, you've seen the Father". So, the people facing persecution for their faith in Yahowsha (Jesus, as they know Him), are hated for HIS name's sake.
Sigh.......Yada, I know you know waaay more than me. But, it would be really cool if I could sit down with you, face to face, and just chat.
It's wearying sharing what you will not hear. Plus, a lot of true communication is lost via emails.

The one thing you can't argue with, is another's testimony of God working in their lives. You can flat out reject it, I suppose.
I don't know what kind of "God experience" you had before doing ITG, but it must have been deader than a doornail.
I really don't even consider myself a Christian anymore. I just want to follow Yahowsha and Yah. But, I DO know Yah has been protecting, providing, speaking to, and loving me, BEFORE I even was aware of Him, and He definitely has been speaking to me very clearly, since I was born from above.
How the heck would anyone even find God, if He didn't first draw them to Himself?
He first draws you to Himself, through the Spirit. He also responds to those who cry out to Him and ask to know His Son.

John 3:12-21
American Standard Version (ASV)
12 If I told you earthly things and ye believe not, how shall ye believe if I tell you heavenly things?

13 And no one hath ascended into heaven, but he that descended out of heaven, even the Son of man, who is in heaven.

14 And as Moses lifted up the serpent in the wilderness, even so must the Son of man be lifted up;

15 that whosoever believeth may in him have eternal life.

16 For God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth on him should not perish, but have eternal life.

17 For God sent not the Son into the world to judge the world; but that the world should be saved through him.

18 He that believeth on him is not judged: he that believeth not hath been judged already, because he hath not believed on the name of the only begotten Son of God.

19 And this is the judgment, that the light is come into the world, and men loved the darkness rather than the light; for their works were evil.

20 For every one that doeth evil hateth the light, and cometh not to the light, lest his works should be reproved.

21 But he that doeth the truth cometh to the light, that his works may be made manifest, that they have been wrought in God.



Yada wrote:
This is not my opinion. Read the conclusion to the Sermon on the Mount. Yahowsha' rejects everyone who is without the Towrah.




Matthew 5:3-12
American Standard Version (ASV)
3 Blessed are the poor in spirit: for theirs is the kingdom of heaven.

4 Blessed are they that mourn: for they shall be comforted.

5 Blessed are the meek: for they shall inherit the earth.

6 Blessed are they that hunger and thirst after righteousness: for they shall be filled.

7 Blessed are the merciful: for they shall obtain mercy.

8 Blessed are the pure in heart: for they shall see God.

9 Blessed are the peacemakers: for they shall be called sons of God.

10 Blessed are they that have been persecuted for righteousness' sake: for theirs is the kingdom of heaven.

11 Blessed are ye when men shall reproach you, and persecute you, and say all manner of evil against you falsely, for my sake.

2 Rejoice, and be exceeding glad: for great is your reward in heaven: for so persecuted they the prophets that were before you.

It sounds like those believers in other countries, who are standing for their faith in Yahowsha (Jesus). American believers haven't truly faced that kind of persecution...yet. But, it's coming. Those who truly love Him, will stand. I see no rejection in the above verses, for not following Towrah. I see us being called to be meek, merciful, pure in heart, seekers of righteousness, and to know we will be persecuted for that and standing for Him.

Here's my take on it....there are TRUE believers (who are definitely changed by knowing Yahowsha) and there are those who say they know Him, but don't have any fruit of a changed heart, or who love this world more than God. Those are the pew warmers in churches all around the world, or the Sunday/Wed. Christians that don't know much more than what their preacher tells them to think, and believe Paul's gospel over Yahowsha's.

But, the Father is drawing those that are truly His, away from organized Christianity. They do have a relationship with Him. I know people like that.

If Yahowsha is the "Towrah made flesh", then wouldn't those really trusting Him, have the Towrah? It's written on their hearts, to follow Him and do what He says.

I'm not the same person I was 20 years ago. I give Him all the credit for that. Yahowsha said "he who is forgiven much, loves much".

The woman who sat at Yahowsha's feet, and washed them with her tears, then dried them with her hair....I get that. Yahowsha is worthy of that kind of love. I follow Him and do my best to do what He asks of me, because I love Him. He loved me first, and forgave me.

Oh, and I understand how speaking out about Paul can get you ostracized.
I have been told I'm going to hell, I'm the "synagogue of Satan", I'm religious, etc., etc.
Most I know understand Islam for what it is.
The battle lines are being drawn in this world. The evil is becoming greater, and the veil is thinning. If the Bible wasn't a threat and those who believe in Jesus weren't a threat, they wouldn't be ostracized for that belief. If the Bible is leading people to a false religion, then why is Satan so dead set on getting it's influence out of schools and society?
These are questions I've pondered. I know Paul is a false apostle, but the truth is still in the Bible. So, even with Paul's influence, to believe in Yahowsha is a threat to the accuser.
Anyway, I've rambled on enough. I hope you have a blessed weekend, Yada.
Take care,
Cathy
ps
I've spent quite a bit of time reading your forum. I find it ironic that most the people on there are even more religious than most Christians I know. The lack of love in there turned my stomach. They also have put you on quite the pedestal. It seems humans have this propensity to do that. Yahowsha said the world would know we were His by our love for one another....and doing what He said, of course.


Yada wrote:
Too bad for your point that this wasn't written on behalf of Christians. Too bad there is no such thing as a Gospel. Too bad not one of those girls know Yahowsha's name or even know Him for that matter. Too bad not one of them is Towrah observant. Too bad Mark wasn't an eyewitness making this hearsay. Too bad they were not persecuted for quoting the Towrah. Too bad that none of this applies.

One evil and false religion is attacking victims of another false religion.


C wrote:
Too bad Yahowah didn't use you as His spokesperson sooner. Maybe there wouldn't be so many people lost, not knowing Yah. Oh wait, He already sent Someone....His Son.


Yada wrote:
And Yahowah's Son said what I'm saying. Too bad Christians don't listen to Him.


Yada wrote:
Then, what is your response to those who He does speak to? They are imagining it?
That's what I keep trying to tell you....there are many, many, believers who hear from Yah.
I'm one of them. You can say all day long that they are being deceived, but they are guided in all kinds of ways (good ways).
So, what's your story? Did you not hear from Him at all while a "practicing Christian"?
Is that why you are so adamant that believers in "Jesus" don't really know Yahowah?
Do you only have the Towrah, Prophets, and Psalms to go by? Does He not speak to you apart from those?
Yahowsha said A LOT of things besides keeping the Towrah. He spoke much on mercy. He WAS merciful. He thanked His Father for revealing the truths of the kingdom to babes....not the learned. He said that those the Father gives Him, will in no way be plucked out of His hand. He spoke on forgiveness and being pure in heart. He hung out with sinners and forgave them and healed them.
He came to seek and to save that which was lost. He will leave the 99 to go find the 1 who wanders off. He comes and gets US.


Yada wrote:
He speaks through His Towrah and Prophets. If you want to hear Him read them. That is His instruction over and over again to us. He says that it is sufficient and should never be added to. He never encourages us to listen to personal and private revelations

There is no reason for Yahowah to provide private revelations. In fact, it would be counter to His nature. Moreover most all of those who claim personal revelations, report messages that are contradictory to what Yahowah has already told us. Just as you are doing.

So, it matters not how or why people report voices. They aren't valid. I've read what you have said and I've read what Yahowah/Yahowsha' said. Since they differ considerably, I choose to trust Yahowah, not you. It is that simple. It is impossible for both you and Yahowah to both be trustworthy when you differ so significantly.

I have long and rewarding conversations with Yahowah every time I observe His Word. He is always there. He is always the same.

If a Christian knew Yahowah, they wouldn't use Jesus. If a Christian knew Yahowsha', they would cease being a Christian. Yahowsha' was Towrah observant. So to follow Him, you'd have to be Towrah observant. But the moment a person becomes Towrah observant, they can no longer be a Christian. It isn't complicated.

If you want confirmation of what I'm sharing with you, read the Towrah and then Yahowsha's Sermon on the Mount.

Yada


C wrote:
Yada wrote:
He never encourages us to listen to personal and private revelations


That's funny, because in order for Moses, and Abraham, and many other's who wrote down the Towrah, Psalms, and prophecies, they had to have a personal and private revelation from Yahowah in the FIRST place.
I get the same thing you do, when I read His Word. But, He also speaks to me in other ways. That's not adding to or taking away from His "Dabar"....that's simply having a relationship.


Yada wrote:
That's funny. So you are a Yisra'elite prophet like Moseh. We are going to have to add another book. Imagine that.

And by the way, the Moseh revelation wasn't private. Read the Towrah.

You probably won't consider it, but here's my parting advice. Don't share your private conversations. That way the only person that you will mislead will be yourself. When you claim divine inspiration and share it you put yourself in a position where either you are 100% correct 100% of the time, or you are condemned. It's the most dangerous claim a person can make. Don't do it for your sake and the sake of others.

I've received a thousand letters from people that hear god in their head. And every one of them without exception reports conversations that are contradictory to what Yahowah conveyed to all of us. It isn't hard to figure out who is telling the truth and who isn't.

Goodbye.
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  
#58 Posted : Tuesday, July 1, 2014 11:48:18 AM(UTC)
James
Joined: 10/23/2007(UTC)
Posts: 2,608
Man
Location: Texas

Thanks: 5 times
Was thanked: 208 time(s) in 146 post(s)
K wrote:
Hi Yada. I hope all is well with you. The last time I spoke with you via email was way back in Dec., last year. I know your very busy so I try not to bother you with thoughtless questions. That said, I'm currently reading ITG again and in chapter 5,Terms, page 30, as I was reading your insights of "You should never murder or kill", before I even got to the explanation of Yahowsha Ben Nun, I was already thinking contradiction. Then I read your explanation. But it still evolves Yah instructing someone to go against His instruction. You've helped me these past years thru your books to reason and think concerning His Word. I understand the Flood and I understand Soddom and Gomorrah, but His prerogative, as you put it in this instance, still has man doing something opposing His instruction. Is this an instance where I'm simply over analyzing? It's really the first time I can't seem to reconcile what I'm reading and what I'm thinking in one of you books. Help!


Yada wrote:
K,

That's a mistake on my part. I've corrected it in the Word docs but not online. The imperfect conjugation should read "you should not continuously kill," and thus "not make a habit of killing." This correction needs to be made for the last 7 statements. This resolves the conflict you have mentioned and is more in keeping with the Torah and Yah's character.

Sorry for the uncorrected error. But it's good that you immediately found the consequence of my mistake.

Yada
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  
#59 Posted : Tuesday, July 8, 2014 6:35:22 PM(UTC)
James
Joined: 10/23/2007(UTC)
Posts: 2,608
Man
Location: Texas

Thanks: 5 times
Was thanked: 208 time(s) in 146 post(s)
RM wrote:
Yada,

If you wouldn’t mind, while y’all are discussing the so-called “food laws”, would you mind explaining how the idea that it is all right to disregard certain of Yahowah’s instructions- such as the one telling us not to consume pork-differs from the rabbinical idea that it was all right to disregard Yahowah’s instructions if their own opinions or conclusions clashed with them? It just seems to be similar to me, as though we were listening to the development of a new Talmud-like mindset. It sounds dangerous to me.

Also, since I’m sure Larry is going to be participating as usual, you might want to explain to the listeners why it is all right for one brother-Larry-to tell another brother on Facebook-R, I’m told-to “fuck off and die” because R refuses to exalt his personal opinion over Yahowah’s recorded testimony? Someone told me about it and it completely pissed me off. I despise every form of bullying, and this sounds like that. Yahowah says that for someone passing by to stop and meddle with trouble not belonging to him is the same as picking a strange dog by the ears. So I have not done anything since hearing about this earlier this week. But you have Larry’s ear, so perhaps you could discuss this with him.

Anyway, I’m looking forward to listening this evening if possible.

Yah bless.

RM


Yada wrote:
RM,

I don't see the correlation between "disregard" in the sense of rejecting a limitation on behavior and my approach which is "learning from," but more importantly, I'm troubled by the extrapolation to rabbinic judaism. So while we are friends and brothers and as such I hold no angst here, typically when someone draws that comparison I become uncomfortable and defensive, even dismissive. So if pushed there, I'll withdraw from doing the show because it would cease to be enjoyable. That's my hot button. That is not intended to persuade anyone or to dissuade any question, but only to say that the moment either of the programs becomes a burden or irritation, I'll turn my attention to those things that I enjoy more and that are more productive.

I know the background on what frustrated Larry, and it wasn't you. It was another person who referred to what we have learned from the 119th Psalm as the "religion of Dowd." That comment was ridiculous. So while I don't think that you were the target of Larry's response in that he mentioned several names and yours was not among them, the is no excuse for "f o a d." Even without the f o, the a d isn't possible for a member of the Covenant, so its absurd.

This is my second least favorite subject so I'm already on edge. You and I have built up a great deal of common trust on our shared mission, so I want you to know for certain that while I don't concur with the hypothetical / analogy / comparison, I don't see this difference as having any bearing on our relationship. I hope that is the same with you.

Yada


RM wrote:
“I don't see this difference as having any bearing on our relationship. I hope that is the same with you.”

Of course it is, Yada. There is nothing that will sever or diminish my love for you as a true and trusted brother in the Covenant. The same is true with Larry. I knew he wasn’t targeting me; I objected to what he said and the attitude it implied. That’s all.

There is no division here, and since I do not use FB anymore I was commenting on what I suppose amounts to hearsay. That is why I said nothing to Larry and left it up to you whether you felt anything should be said to him.

If you stop doing the programs I will draw a stick-figure face with you name underneath it and throw darts at it.

RM


Yada wrote:
Thank you brother. I appreciate this response.

I'm not quite as keen on the darts idea, however. I'm a bleeder. (and crier).

Yada


Yada wrote:
So brother, how'd I do on this one? What did you think of the message tonight?

Yada


RM wrote:
Wow, I fell asleep about 10 minutes in and just woke up. I’ve missed the BTR AND F’s Skype call! Let me download the BTR and listen to it, Yada. My old feller body is getting’ more and more sleepy nowadays.

But I tell you what. Even before listening to what you had to say, I can tell you that I am genuinely warmed that you’d ask my opinion. Let me go get that thing and have a listen to it.

Big R with the bigger B (as in belly)


Yada wrote:
RM,

This is a decisive topic which tends to engender hostile opposition and dug in positions, so it's hard to cover it without ruffling lots of feathers. My hope was to provide some perspective, showing the range of options and preferences, revealing the history associated with this topic, while providing new insights to contemplate, all in a way that encourages mutual respect, knowing that I'm not likely to change anyone's existing mindset. So per your request I did my best to answer and address the issues you raised in your letter. I hope you and others found it thought provoking.

We may not agree on this issue, but it's always a good thing to go to the Source and consider what the Torah teaches - even if a black and white answer escapes us. Sometimes I think Yah simply wants us to study and think about things like this, and that this process can be as important as the answer.

I have not shared any of these emails with anyone, but if you'd like to share them on your site and with others, that's fine with me if you think there is merit to the way we have worked our way through this challenging material.

Yada


RM wrote:
Yada,

How like our Father to create an animal that eats its food in the same way that He wants us to consume His teachings, instructions, and advice! Get a whole mouthful, munch on it at least enough to be able to swallow it all, let it sit in our minds for a bit, doing what He sent it to do, then purposefully recall it and consider it in a relaxed, stress-free setting. Swallow our conclusions and insights, let them do their thing within. Repeat as necessary and whenever desired.

Awesome.

I don’t know what you went through emotionally to bring that out for us, Yada, but I for one will never be the same after hearing and understanding it.

Look. I am not the best there is at foreseeing the possible repercussions of saying something that’s on my mind. Nor have I ever been accused of being a star at thinking things all the way through. I believe my email to you in which I compared yours and Larry’s actions to those of the rabbis who developed the Talmud proves that. I am more than sorry that I wrote what I wrote and thought what I thought: I am actually ashamed after hearing how it affected you. Not only was it unkind and off-target, it caused you a painful and offensive distraction which you don’t need, especially not from a brother and friend. I can’t tell you how sorry I am, Yada. And again, I appreciate the class and respect you demonstrated with your responses.

I am not sure I want to publish this thread on my web site, because it shows what a prick I can be. However, this whole little episode could be instructive, I think. So if you want James to post it up on the forum, you have my permission. I’m pretty sure it didn’t tickle Dode to learn that Yahowah was going to record his “antics” for all the world to read. And of how much less am I worth than Dode!

May Yahowah be with you and all of yours on this beautiful Shabat, Yada.

RM


Yada wrote:
RM,

I appreciate the positive feedback, Richard. And please, don't be hard on yourself. That wasn't my intent.

You would have had no reason to know that my hot button is being compared to those who are religious. And honestly, less that 1% of those alive today would have been aware that the comparison wasn't valid. More telling still, less than one in a thousand would recognize the fallacy when revealed, and less than one in a million would have the character to acknowledge it. Both of which you did. That makes you a remarkable individual.

So rather than being a jerk, you were actually extraordinarily reasonable and kind. Additionally, you were not only polite in your request, you bit your tongue and were slow to react to the inappropriate "f.o.& d. d." reference, which I suspect may have been used to deflect criticisms others had made against me. Larry is very protective of me. He's a tough guy who has been trained to fight for his friends.

I think we all learned something new, grew a bit in the process, and are better for the voyage through Yah's Towrah. I know I am.

Long time ago and far, far away you and I would both have come to verbal blows over lessor issues. So rather than apologize, you should be very proud of yourself. Heck, I'm proud of you.

Yada

PS... I'm also pretty impressed with the separated foot design too because it means that our nourishment should come only from those who are walking away from that which is opposed to Yah, separating themselves from the crowd.
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  
#60 Posted : Thursday, July 10, 2014 7:59:29 AM(UTC)
James
Joined: 10/23/2007(UTC)
Posts: 2,608
Man
Location: Texas

Thanks: 5 times
Was thanked: 208 time(s) in 146 post(s)
C wrote:
First I want to thank you for your writings (I'm currently reading An Introduction to God) and for your radio show. You present the state of current affairs in the most hopeless fashion due to religion and politics and yet by explaining God's perspective on religion and politics you offer the very hope that GCN host like Alex Jones can't provide.

Can you share with me your thoughts on circumcision? I am new to the idea of embracing the covenant and rejecting the ridiculous political and religious institutions of man.

As such I've come to chapter 3 part 1 of An Introduction to God. In it, you have demonstrated that the first requirement of the Covenant is circumcision.

As an adult male quite frankly I'm terrified of this. As a researcher like yourself I decided to look at what this procedure looks like because I really had no idea. What I saw inspired much fear. I say that part jokingly and yet I paced the confines of my one bedroom apartment considering what that experience might actually be like. I was sweating and the whole nine yards.

At least the fact that I find it so upsetting speaks to the idea that I am considering actually doing it if that is indeed the obstacle between me and Passover and the rest of the Invitations to meet with God.

What is your understanding? As I understand things there is no medical reason to do this and yet I want to be part of God's Covenant Family. Do you interpret this as a requirement or is the understanding of what it symbolizes the important part of the procedure and not the actual physical act of circumcision?

Thank you for considering this question. You have inspired me to at the very least take the first steps of rejecting religion and politics. Suffice it to say that turning from Babylon is beyond liberating. You have assisted me in arriving to the conclusion that I don't have to care what the Federal Reserve is doing or care about the filthy lies spewing out of the White House, etc. except to understand them from the perspective of how futile and corrupt man's institutions really are.

Thank you,

C


Yada wrote:
C,

I appreciate your encouraging words. Thank you. Yah's message is a wonderful alternative to human schemes.

To get directly to your question, my opinion is irrelevant. But according to Yahowah in the Torah, circumcision is the sign of the Covenant. It is one of the five terms and conditions which must be accepted to participate in the Covenant. It is non negotiable. I am sorry that your parents failed you in this regard. But I'm pleased that you can correct their mistake. More than anything, I'm thrilled that you want to be part of Yahowah's family.

Because the first four Invitations to Meet with God provide the benefits of the Covenant, men have to be circumcised to attend Passover, which is the doorway to eternal life and the entrance to Yahowah's home. The requirement is clearly defined. There is no getting around it. Circumcision is also required to enter Heaven, but this is really for the same reason, since only the Covenant's children belong.

So the answer to your question from Yahowah's perspective is clear - since you want to be adopted into His family you need to be circumcised.

I know of many men who have been in your position who have had it done. They all say that it wasn't dangerous, it wasn't painful, nor was it even a serious procedure. They were all back to work without discomfort the following day. There is no requirement on how much is removed or who does the cutting. And there are many doctors willing to do the procedure.

If you go to www.BlessYahowah.com you will find that the Shattering Myths archives are labeled by topic. Among them you will find several programs devoted entirely to circumcision. Also, in the Covenant Volume of www.IntroToGod.com, which you are currently reading, you will find a presentation of all of the essential information on circumcision from Yahowah.

When it is done as Yah asks, with parents seeing to it that their sons are circumcised on the 8th day, there are many positives. It is a simple, quick, safe, and beneficial procedure. But for you now, this day, it is your commitment to Yah that you have left Babylon and are now eternally His son, adopted into His Covenant family, inheriting all of its promises.

It is the greatest offer ever made. We look forward to you becoming part of Yah's family.

I don't know your past, but if you have been a Christian, you have probably been influenced by Paul. He opposed circumcision, the Torah, and the Covenant. So if Paul's letters are an issue for you, you many want to consider reading www.QuestioningPaul.com. If not, the book is still a good read because as a member of Yah's family you will naturally want to share your experience and His offer with those you love.

Yada
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  
#61 Posted : Monday, July 14, 2014 8:51:02 PM(UTC)
James
Joined: 10/23/2007(UTC)
Posts: 2,608
Man
Location: Texas

Thanks: 5 times
Was thanked: 208 time(s) in 146 post(s)
AE wrote:
Hi Yada,

I was just reading a recent letter on the forum that was sent to you disagreeing with the timing of the feasts.

I wanted to share some interesting information I came across while reading Josephus's "Antiquities of the Jews".

I realize Josephus was not the most moral guy but I can't think of any reason he would write an inaccurate description of how his people celebrated the feasts in the first century CE. I am therefore inclined to give the following description credence. It's confirming for me.

I thought you might find it interesting as well.

Regards,
AE

Antiquities 3.10.5

"5. In the month of Xanthicus, which is by us called Nisan, and is the beginning of our year, on the fourteenth day of the lunar month, when the sun is in Aries, (for in this month it was that we were delivered from bondage under the Egyptians,) the law ordained that we should every year slay that sacrifice which I before told you we slew when we came out of Egypt, and which was called the Passover; and so we do celebrate this passover in companies, leaving nothing of what we sacrifice till the day following. The feast of unleavened bread succeeds that of the passover, and falls on the fifteenth day of the month, and continues seven days, wherein they feed on unleavened bread; on every one of which days two bulls are killed, and one ram, and seven lambs. Now these lambs are entirely burnt, besides the kid of the goats which is added to all the rest, for sins; for it is intended as a feast for the priest on every one of those days. But on the second day of unleavened bread, which is the sixteenth day of the month, they first partake of the fruits of the earth, for before that day they do not touch them. And while they suppose it proper to honor God, from whom they obtain this plentiful provision, in the first place, they offer the first-fruits of their barley, and that in the manner following: They take a handful of the ears, and dry them, then beat them small, and purge the barley from the bran; they then bring one tenth deal to the altar, to God; and, casting one handful of it upon the fire, they leave the rest for the use of the priest. And after this it is that they may publicly or privately reap their harvest. They also at this participation of the first-fruits of the earth, sacrifice a lamb, as a burnt- offering to God.

6. When a week of weeks has passed over after this sacrifice, (which weeks contain forty and nine days,) on the fiftieth day, which is Pentecost, but is called by the Hebrews Asartha, which signifies Pentecost, they bring to God a loaf, made of wheat flour, of two tenth deals, with leaven; and for sacrifices they bring two lambs; and when they have only presented them to God, they are made ready for supper for the priests; nor is it permitted to leave any thing of them till the day following. They also slay three bullocks for a burnt-offering, and two rams; and fourteen lambs, with two kids of the goats, for sins; nor is there anyone of the festivals but in it they offer burnt-offerings; they also allow themselves to rest on every one of them. Accordingly, the law prescribes in them all what kinds they are to sacrifice, and how they are to rest entirely, and must slay sacrifices, in order to feast upon them."


Yada wrote:
AE,

Some of what Josephus writes is accurate and some of it is not. Since it's not inspired, and since Yah was adverse to most everything the rabbis said and did, I don't view this as credible. But if you do, I suspect that you'll separate Passover from Unleavened Bread and eat matsah for 8 days not 7. The former might prove a problem but the latter shouldn't be.

Yahowah calls the month Abyb which defines its timing and purpose. Rabbis preferred Nisan. And there is no Torah reference to the astrological sign, something Yah would see as being of the occult. Moreover, the "release from bondage" summation of Passover's purpose substantially stunts the benefit of the Miqra'. Those mistakes aside, the repetitive statement that "nothing of what we sacrifice was left till the day following" is not only consistent with the Torah, but also death to Christianity. As for Shabuw'ah, Yah never refers to it as "Asartha" or "Pentecost."

It is obvious from reading this that Josephus was oblivious of the purpose of these days.

Yada
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  
#62 Posted : Thursday, July 17, 2014 2:21:50 PM(UTC)
James
Joined: 10/23/2007(UTC)
Posts: 2,608
Man
Location: Texas

Thanks: 5 times
Was thanked: 208 time(s) in 146 post(s)
KS wrote:
Greetings Yada,

I found your show podcasts by browsing through the GCN archives. I'm just learning that the letter J is only 500 something years old so I'm a little wet behind the ears.

What are your thoughts on:

Malachi 4:2
"But unto you that fear my name shall the Sun of righteousness arise with healing in his wings;

What's this, sun worship? I've always wondered about that...

Jeremiah 23:26-27
26 How long shall this be in the heart of the prophets that prophesy lies? yea, they are prophets of the deceit of their own heart;

27 Which think to cause my people to forget my name by their dreams which they tell every man to his neighbour, as their fathers have forgotten my name for Baal.

Well, there's certainly a lot of people on this planet who have never even heard the correct name. Your thoughts?

To your knowledge, is there a previous 'virgin birth' in Isaiah 8:3?

And, the last question for now goes back to Exodus: If He gave men free will, how was it that He caused the pharaoh's heart to harden?

Thanks, and you can answer by email or on your show. I'm especially enjoying what you're doing on the third hour. Shalom shalom!


Yada wrote:
KS,

The first J representing a consonant sound was invented in the late 16th century and then used for the first time in the mid 17th century.

In Mal'aky / Messenger we are told that Yah's light will become brighter than the sun. It is a reference to the Greater Luminary foretold in the fourth day of creation. Yah is saying that He is the only source of light we will need in the Covenant Family. So it is a symbolic reference to Yah perfecting, enriching, empowering, and enlightening His children throughout eternity with His "tsadaq - righteous and vindicating" light.

Most people have never heard of Yahowah's name for the reason Yahowah states. People pretending to speak for Him have lied. Religions have deliberately replaced Yahowah with "Ba'al - Lord."

I can see how you'd come to the virgin birth with Isaiah 8.3, but I neither suspect that it happened that way nor do I think it is the purpose of the statement. In actuality, prophet is masculine in the DSS so it is Yisra'el that is symbolically conceiving a child whose name portends its future fate.

“And so (wa) I went (qarab – I approached, appearing before, and coming) to (‘el) the prophet (ha naby – person conveying the message of a deity (masculine in the DSS and feminine in the MT) and she conceived (wa harah – she became pregnate) and she gave birth to a son (wa yalad ben). And Yahowah (Yahwah) said (‘amar) to me (‘el), ‘Call out (qara’) his name (shem) Maher Shalal Chash Baz – Swift Plunder Hasty Spoil (Maher Shalal Chash Baz).”

To preempt one person's freewill for a period of time does not negate the gift of freewill for 99.999999% of us or for 99.99999999% of time. When you read the account with Pharaoh in context, Pharaoh had a lifetime to do the right thing, but didn't. And Yah gave him several chances to make the right call during his meetings with Moseh.
But ultimately, Pharaoh as a promoter of religion and politics was never going to accept Yah, so Yah used him to convey the Exodus account to us in accord with His timing and plan. Had Pharaoh relented earlier, then there would have been no basis for explaining the purpose of Passover. So Yah's plan of salvation would have been negated had Satan inspired Pharaoh to capitulate among the frogs.

Good questions. Thanks for listening. Please call in: 877-300-7645.



Yada
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  
#63 Posted : Thursday, August 14, 2014 11:37:51 AM(UTC)
James
Joined: 10/23/2007(UTC)
Posts: 2,608
Man
Location: Texas

Thanks: 5 times
Was thanked: 208 time(s) in 146 post(s)
PG wrote:
Hi Yada , This is PG .
V and I have been reading through yadayahweh . We are blessed by the purity and lack of religion in your writings . It is truly refreshing .
A question I have is this ; how does the tithes and offerings that are talked about in the scriptures apply to us today ?

Much thanks
PG


Yada wrote:
PG,

Literally, they don't. There is no Temple Storehouse. And all that was offered was wood and wool, no money. Food was made available for harvest on the corners of farms. It was only designed to help widows and orphans. As spiritual instruction, however, helping people help themselves is always a good idea.

It's sad that so many Christian religious con artists ignore every part of the "OT" except this one, and even then, they corrupt the message.

The greatest gift you can give is to raise your children so that they want to be Yahowah's children. Second onto that would be preparing yourself to share Yah's testimony with those who want to know Him.

Yada
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  
#64 Posted : Monday, August 18, 2014 8:08:58 AM(UTC)
James
Joined: 10/23/2007(UTC)
Posts: 2,608
Man
Location: Texas

Thanks: 5 times
Was thanked: 208 time(s) in 146 post(s)
PG from above

PG wrote:
Wow , thank you so much the truth that you have spoken has knocked condemnation off of us . It has never made sense to me that yah my father would demand money for blessings . We too believe in helping were we are led to help . We have been teaching the children about the feasts and I had questions about the offerings . I also am not sure about how much of the feasts does yah want us to do ? For example the foods on passover , building a shelter for shelters , honoring the extra Sabbaths ? So far what we have been doing is teaching the meaning of each feast on the day of it . Any wisdom , insight you can offer us will be deeply appreciated :)

PG


Yada wrote:
PG,

Like you, I focus on the purpose for the days and then consider and share their meaning.

I'd do the basics to reinforce the message with your children. As for me, I eat lamb on Passover with un-yeasted bread and bitter herbs, and then continue to eat un-yeasted bread for seven days. I try to make the two Shabatowns associated with Matsah special. And if I had young children at home, I'd pitch a tent in the family room on Sukah and celebrate camping out with Yah in that way. The tents are for those in Yisra'el, but the symbolism is still valuable.

Yada


PG wrote:
Thank you for sharing , we love building shelters with bamboo :) I was not sure on how much was expected for us and how much was for Israel.
We are reading through yadayahweh and I am awed at how clear, simple and pure yahs message is to us . We are so grateful for the time and sacrifice that you have given to help bring the pure word of yah . After being raised and brainwashed by religion it is a huge blessing to know the truth .
Do you know of any websites that would have copys of any of your broadcasts ? I have a lot of time when on the tractor to listen .

Thanks PG


Yada wrote:
PG,

You and your wife V came to know Yahowah because you wanted to know Him and made finding Him a priority. You were able to leave your prior religious indoctrination because you were open minded and willing to listen, especially when the truth was in conflict with the elders. And I suspect that you did so as much for your children as you did for yourselves.

Yahowah's message is simple and clear, but most either ignore it or reject it as a result of political, social, academic, media, or religious influences. He wants a family. So what I'm saying is that your participation in the Covenant is predicated upon the choices you and Virginia have made. All I did was point you in the right direction when you asked during those long walks in the woods.

I translate and analyze Yah's Word because I find it enjoyable and rewarding. I share what I've learned because these benefits are even more enjoyable and rewarding when shared. I can't imagine not sharing the greatest gift ever offered.

The best source for the Shattering Myths and Yada Yah archives is www.BlessYahowah.com. The site is owned and managed by Richard who is a good friend and part of the Covenant family. Additionally, at www.YHWH-QRA.com you'll find an audio version of each of the books I've written. That site is provided by Don, another great guy.

Yada
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  
#65 Posted : Friday, September 12, 2014 5:27:36 PM(UTC)
James
Joined: 10/23/2007(UTC)
Posts: 2,608
Man
Location: Texas

Thanks: 5 times
Was thanked: 208 time(s) in 146 post(s)
GG wrote:
Dear Yada

One of the things that has been bothering me is proper accounting of the 3 days Yahowsha spent in the grave. Many teach that He was impaled on the 4th day of the week and then lifted up on the feast of Bikuyrim. This I noted on the calendar of the Torah institute for the appointed times for 2015 but I also realized that a day is not accounted for. Some say it was a Friday but when computed does not account of the 3 days Yahowsha was in the grave. I have tried to use scripture to understand the proper account of this act and keep seeing that He spent such time in the grave. But there in lies the problem of errant translations. Please assist me in clarifying this.

The Christian calendar for easter always coincides with the Natsarim first fruits. Is it because of what Constantine 1 did at the council of Nicea? I read that the Roman Catholic Church calculates this based on the first new moon after the spring equinox.

I believe at sunset on the 12th of September will be the 1st day of the 7th month for the commencement of Yom Teruah (rest day). Do we follow a specific time for the observation or do we simply rely on our individual time zones?

Thank you.

GG


Yada wrote:
GG,

This one is so easy, I don't understand why so many are confused. Dany'el's prediction has Yahowsha' arriving in Yaruwshalaim on Monday in 33 CE, four days before Passover - when the lamb was brought into the home. That prophecy is presented in the Salvation Volume of Yada Yah. In 33 CE, Passover commenced on Thursday at sunset, which is why Yahowsha' ate Passover dinner at that time. The following day, Friday in 33 CE, is Passover, which is when Yahowsha' served as the Passover Lamb. The Shabatown of Matsah fell on a natural Shabat in 33 CE as one would expect. The Firstborn was released from She'owl on the first day of the week in celebration of Bikuwrym. Each Miqra' was celebrated on the correct date for the correct reason.

Examine the moon phases in 33 CE, Year 4000 Yah, and you'll discover that it all fits. But for someone to claim that He did not fulfill Passover on Passover or Unleavened Bread on Unleavened Bread, then they ought not speak for Yah.

Also, for Passover to be fulfilled correctly the body of Yahowsha' was destroyed that night. So there is no possibility of three days and three nights in the grave.

The confusion is a result of not understanding the sign Yahowsha' gave to the religious morons. He does not say that His body would exist in the grave for three days. One of the Yada Yah chapters covers the Yownah example and explains how to interpret the sign.
- http://yadayahweh.com/Ya...nted_Meeting_Times.YHWH.

I see no value in discussing the Christian Easter or its timing. I just don't care.

It is impossible for the 12th of September 2014 to be the first day of any month because it's a full moon. Months begin with renewal not degrading of light. Check the definition of chadash. Taruwah is Wednesday 9-24 this year. All seven Invitations begin at sunset wherever you may live.

Yada
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  
#66 Posted : Tuesday, September 16, 2014 8:05:17 AM(UTC)
James
Joined: 10/23/2007(UTC)
Posts: 2,608
Man
Location: Texas

Thanks: 5 times
Was thanked: 208 time(s) in 146 post(s)
T wrote:
Hi Yada,

So I was doing more of my obsessive research and came across an interesting blog with some alternative perspectives. Now, I can say upfront, I believe your information about Paul and this woman also has not translated most of the King James Bible into the correct Ancient Hebrew text, but she does have some interesting things to say about the original YHWH being inserted at a latter date and having ties with Baal. She thinks Yahowah's true name is Ahayah and Yahowsha's name is Yahshiya. (I admittedly need to reread the Introduction to Yada and get a really good grasp on the Paleo Hebrew language, I have just had an overload of information over the past few months so I get turned around easily) I was just curious as to what you thought about this. Thanks! And I have been listening and enjoying the radio shows as well.




(http://ahayahyashiya.blogspot.com/2013/02/yhwhyhvh-and-ahayah-illuminati-knows.html)

Sincerly T


Yada wrote:
T,

Based upon your review of her opinions, I'm not going to waste my time with this.

Yahowah was not added later and it is not associated with Ba'al. The KJV is the worst of many horrible English translations. The letters are not consonants. They do not represent father, mother, or son. And there is no way that YHWH is pronounced Ahayah. So this is too stupid for words.

Yada


You have to love the stupidity and blatant disregard for the text. She sites Shemoth/Exodus

"And God sad unto Moses, I AM hath sent me unto you...this is my memorial unto all generations." (Exodus 3:14-15).

You notice she ellipses the middle, the part she is willfully and purposely leaving out reads, "“Thus you are to say to the children of Yisra’ĕl, ‘יהוה Elohim of your fathers, the Elohim of Aḇraham, the Elohim of Yitsḥaq, and the Elohim of Yaʽaqoḇ, has sent me to you." Which completely destroys her argument. So many are want to cite Exodus 3:14 to "prove" his name is unknown or is I AM, but they all ignore the very next verse where he says his name is YAHOWAH. FYI the end of her quote, the part following the ellipses follows the part I cited thus his memorial unto all generations is not I AM but YAHOWAH.

Then:

"I AM the Lord thy God...thou shalt have no other gods before me" (Exodus 32:4-5).

Lord here is YHWH in the Hebrew so it reads I am YAHOWAH your God.

Case closed this woman is willfully deceiving herself and others.
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  
#67 Posted : Friday, September 26, 2014 11:18:29 AM(UTC)
James
Joined: 10/23/2007(UTC)
Posts: 2,608
Man
Location: Texas

Thanks: 5 times
Was thanked: 208 time(s) in 146 post(s)
AM wrote:
Dear Author ,

I've listened to several of your youtube lectures .They are very interesting and definitely eye opening and thank you for providing us with such important information . Would you ,please , explain to me what " Yahowsha" mean? Is it God himself taking a human form ? I thought mashiah , described in Tanakh, is a regular human being who God will appoint one day to bring new world order through His Torah . The mashiah supposed to come from king David family according to Scriptures . Also ,if this Yahowshah is God himself - as according to what I understood from your lectures - than why God said to Moses that "nobody who saw my face ever lived" ? I'm very confused ,please let me know the truth .

Sincerely,
AM


Yada wrote:
AM,

These questions are answered for you in the Name Volume of www.IntroToGod.org. Yahowsha' is a compound of Yahowah and yasha' - save. Yahowsha' is a diminished corporeal/physical manifestation of Yahowah set apart from Him to fulfill His promises.

Yada
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  
#68 Posted : Tuesday, September 30, 2014 7:50:46 AM(UTC)
James
Joined: 10/23/2007(UTC)
Posts: 2,608
Man
Location: Texas

Thanks: 5 times
Was thanked: 208 time(s) in 146 post(s)
AM wrote:
Thank you so much for responding to my inquiry regarding the meaning of "yahowsha" word and leading me to information on your website .Explaining the Hebrew language is very clever idea when you trying to understand the scriptures . However the only problem I encountered while reading the chapter on Name of God was the connection of Torah to NT's chapter of Matthew ,because credibility of all books in the Gospels is very questionable and full of contradictions . And it's not only a matter of Jesus's name (which ,according to the Greek text is "iEsou "),but his teaching that contradicts Torah , historical inaccuracy ,genealogy issues and unreliability in general .Would God allow Yahowsha to encourage his followers to eat unclean food ,let alone to do ministry work on sabbath ? I can't picture a Roman soldier trying to negotiate death sentence with Jew either , or virgin birth as in Homer's Greek mythology . If there is any connection of Torah and the chapter of Matthew perhaps is it God's warning not to worship idols - "God hated Esau ( iEsou/Jesus) but loved Jacob (Yacobos/James ) ".
But ,with all the respect ,Sir , I would appreciate any additional information with Torah and Nt connection .

Thank you again ,
sincerely,
AM


Yada wrote:
AM,

I don't consider Mattanyah inspired, but to the extent that it was translated correctly from Hebrew to Greek and the retained over the first two centuries, it provides the best witness of Yahowsha's testimony.

Yada


AM wrote:
Dear Author ,

NT was originally written in Koine Greek and there for it didn't need to be translated . It looks to me that you confused it with Torah( aka OT ) , which was later translated into Greek - this translation is called Septuagint . Claiming that God walked around , contradicting His Torah and then at the end allowed himself to be killed is just plain absurd .
But thank you for your time to respond to my emails .

GOD IS ONE ,may He bless you .
Sincerely,
AM


Yada wrote:
AM, you would be best served reading www.IntroToGod.org from beginning to end, starting with the opening volume, if you want to understand my research and conclusions regarding Yahowah and His Towrah and then secondarily, Mattanyah and Yahowchanan. You are making many unfounded claims. For example, all of the conversations recorded in these eyewitness accounts took place in Hebrew and Matanyah's testimony was originally written in Hebrew, not Greek.

There is no New Testament so there is no OT either, just the Torah, Prophets, and Psalms. The Covenant has not yet been renewed.

Yahowsha' is the corporeal manifestation of the Torah, observing it, fulfilling it, explaining it. He did not contradict it or negate it in any way. The best way to understand Him is to understand the Towrah.

Yahowah is One, Yahowah is God. Yahowsha' is a diminished manifestation of Yahowah set apart from Him. Part of someone does not make two of them. The Spirit is similarly set apart.

You are on the right path, AM, but you are drawing some inaccurate conclusions. Please continue to read. I am not aware of a more accurate presentation of the Towrah, of Yahowah, of Yahowsha', of the Covenant, or of the words that bring us these insights than www.YadaYah.com and www.IntroToGod.org.

Yada

Edited by user Tuesday, September 30, 2014 9:57:08 AM(UTC)  | Reason: Not specified

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  
#69 Posted : Thursday, October 2, 2014 1:23:33 PM(UTC)
James
Joined: 10/23/2007(UTC)
Posts: 2,608
Man
Location: Texas

Thanks: 5 times
Was thanked: 208 time(s) in 146 post(s)
AM from above

AM wrote:
Sir , Nt was entirely written in Greek . The few Aramaic words or phrases that it contains do not make it more credible .The chapter of Matthew was written by Paul and a name of Matthew was just inserted there to give it some authorship .There is absolutely no historical evidence from any eyewitness records that J-c ( yahowsha as you prefer to call him) even existed . Notice that Flavius Josephus was not even born till after alleged crucifixion .So all stories about J-c came only from people of christian faith .And in the book of John you will find a following statement : " these stories were written so you believe J-c was the messiah " . If you chose to believe " these stories"….
By OT and NT I just meant the reference to the two books and not to what they represent .
Now "yshuw'ah " is a Hebrew word for salvation ,deliverance; hence , aid, prosperity , help . In Torah sentences where people pray, ask or acknowledge God's help this term is often used . God also manifested Himself as a male person ,cloud ,messenger ,thunder etc . I think some of the phrases used in Hebrew language made you confused as its the grammar is completely different from English .
It is clear to me that your point of view is influenced by christian faith or maybe kabbalah which describes something like seven parts of God .
God of Israel doesn't require blood sacrifices for the sin but repentance, poor people could offer flour if they were not able to afford a lamb or a goat . Also sacrifice offering from the wicked person (like an idol worshiper ) is considered abomination to God so repentance is always the key to salvation . With that said crucifixion would be a pointless act and claiming that God walked around for 30 years in His human form , advertising and contradicting His Torah at the same time , got himself killed without accomplishing anything - that's a slap in God's " face ".
I hope you realize , Sir , you are playing with big ball of fire .

Sincerely ,

AM


Yada wrote:
Based upon the escalation of inaccuracies and hostilities in your letters, there is no reason to continue communicating with you. I misjudged you for someone who was actually striving to learn. Please don't write me again.

Yada

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  
#70 Posted : Tuesday, October 7, 2014 7:23:39 PM(UTC)
James
Joined: 10/23/2007(UTC)
Posts: 2,608
Man
Location: Texas

Thanks: 5 times
Was thanked: 208 time(s) in 146 post(s)
B wrote:
Hi Yada. I listen everyday to GCN & the Shabat shows. Always enlightening.
Question. Lev 23:29 where Yah says that whatever soul does not respond on that day shall be cut off. The cut off part is written in the Niphal Perfect. Does that mean that if one does not repond once, they are out of the family? Correct me if I am wrong but doesn't the imperfect mean on going?
I hope that's not to confusing.
Thank you.
B


Yada wrote:
B,

Wow, this is an impressive question. I had to put on me thenken cap to figure it out. So, here is a fresh translation which is always a good place to start...

Indeed (ky – surely), any soul (kol ha nepesh) who beneficially (‘asher – relationally) is not moved to continually respond (lo’ ‘anah – is not influenced to reply and answer on an ongoing basis (pual imperfect – the subject (the soul) is being acted upon continually and is passively influencing an ongoing condition associated with the object (the essential day))) in the essential day (ba ‘etsem ha yowm – on the corporeal day) it (ha zeh – addressing the soul (from third person singular) will be totally and actually cut off (karat – will be completely excommunicated and banished, wholly uprooted and die disassociated (niphal perfect – passively, actually, and once and for all)) from (min) the family (‘am).” (Qara’ 23.29)

Based upon this, the niphal perfect is depicting the consequence of our inaction so it does not suggest that we can't miss a YK. Our inaction on this day was in the imperfect, giving us considerably flexibility but giving Yah none. So your understanding of the stems and conjugations is accurate but you were misapplying what part of this is our doing versus the consequence of our decision.

Great question.

Yada
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
thanks 1 user thanked James for this useful post.
FredSnell on 10/15/2014(UTC)
Offline James  
#71 Posted : Wednesday, October 22, 2014 7:58:14 AM(UTC)
James
Joined: 10/23/2007(UTC)
Posts: 2,608
Man
Location: Texas

Thanks: 5 times
Was thanked: 208 time(s) in 146 post(s)
J wrote:
C,
There are hard and perplexing questions which need to be asked of him,
and double dealings to be known regarding him. So they should say, ‘Woe to
the one who claims to be great so as to increase his offspring, acting like a
rabbi, when neither apply to him. For how long will they make pledges based
upon his significance, becoming burdened by his testimony?’” (Chabaquwq /
Embrace This / Habakkuk 2:6)

Re: 10/15, 3rd hr. SM show
Yah tells us Sha'uwl was not a rabbi.
J


J wrote:
C,
Just a thought...
Could it be that Sha'uwl wanted to take judaism down because he washed out of the rabbi (elitist) program? Could it be that Paulos, inspired by ha Satan, accused the Towrah as the causation of his perversions? Both allowing him and the demon possessing him to focus on Greek and Roman cultures in creating the new religion of Christianity?
j


Yada wrote:
Yes, J, these are both valid and important points that I failed to connect. I'll mention this tomorrow. Thanks.

Yada
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  
#72 Posted : Wednesday, October 22, 2014 8:07:14 AM(UTC)
James
Joined: 10/23/2007(UTC)
Posts: 2,608
Man
Location: Texas

Thanks: 5 times
Was thanked: 208 time(s) in 146 post(s)
Originally Posted by: J& Go to Quoted Post
Dear Yada,

Im writing you this letter as a result of the Sukka show you did Oct 09 with Larry. Im contacting you because what Im about to tell you about Ive already told Larry, we had spoken on the phone and still agree on 99% of most things. But Larry all but accused me of being i league with Satan and blocked me after a while after I kept asserting what I know. What I know has to do with balls of light, the last days, and Yahowahs family. I have some really weird stuff to tell you, obviously so much so if I made Larry lose his mind....

I guess I will just blast you with as much as I can and hope that you are able to make sense of i all.. I hope that you read all of the information that Im about to impart to you and Im curious what your response might be...

p.s. I never told you about any of this out of fear

Disclaimer:

- When I am referring to a particular video it will not necessarily be the video that is being displayed, altough all of the videos I refer to are played at one point.
- When this audio was recorded I had confused paintings of John the Apostle as being John the Baptist

Jonathan Aube Story: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0yC8IdVcv6o

After I had returned from work on that faithful day the first thing that I did was a Google Image Search for Saint John... What I found knocked me on my ass for a few days...


John1 : http://uploads5.wikiart....elist-on-patmos-1544.jpg
John2 :http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/e/ef/Hans_Burgkmair_d._Ž._-_St_John_the_Evangelist_in_Patmos_-_WGA03699.jpg
John3:http://1.bp.blogspot.com/_OHdzk3JlsgY/TSE1qY6o9NI/AAAAAAAAGzg/B72ybMlVaUs/s640/John_of%20Patmos_BALDUNG%20GRIEN,%20Hans.jpg
John4 :http://www.1st-art-gallery.com/thumbnail/356366/1/Saint-John-On-Patmos.jpg
John5 :http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-LSXsXDwyOO4/Tcg0G3MexHI/AAAAAAAAAxg/W0Xv_wrlgXs/s1600/5437-st-john-the-evangelist-on-patmos-cosme-tura.jpg

* Of particular interest would be the MASSIVE BLACK BIRD ... the Golden Clouds, and the robed people greeting me.

Please don't tell me that I am Satan like Larry did... I will tell you two things very fast... In the Book of Revelations Yahowsha told me that I would return to do prophecy... the other is a complaint that came from Bon Bon(Bonnie) who you and Larry recently gave kudos to... When I told her that I was who I said I am recently and she knows MUCH MUCH MORE.. She said the only reason against it was because it wasnt Towrah.. I reminded her of when God told me to stop writing and that I should eat the scroll I had written, and how it tasted bitter.
Regardless of what you think of all this I hope that it brings you some insight and happiness... Also, you"re right about everything you say/report. You've read Gods word and everything that you've said would happen will...

So concerning those light beings you wonder in amazement about.... We actually had one(a Malach or a family member) in our house tonight for Sukka.... We saw it for a combined total of 8 seconds-ish.. My wife and I were both amazed butI I chalked it up to that they literally dont have anyone to hang out with cause we're a scarce bunch.

Anyways, I love you for all of Gods words that you've shared with me, and I will continue to listen to your radio broadcasts as long as they go on.

p.p.s. please dont treat me poorly... If the information that Ive shared with you offends you in any way then I apologize... and if you mean to insult or lambast me then Id prefer it that we just part ways.

p.p.p.s. I have the resolve of Dowd in that I know even if I am completely out to lunch with all this, I still participate in th Covenant and God has made me assurances.

p.p.p.p.s. I'm not out to lunch and everything that Ive shown you should terrify you.... Breath into a paper bag if need be or imbibe or something, I really dont know


Hope we talk soon

Love,
J&A


Yada wrote:
J&A,

I don't know what to say other than we disagree on Chem Trails and on UFOs and that's how you begin in the initial attached video. Further, I have no interest in religious paintings and do not see them as valid or insightful. If you have a point other than these things that you'd like me to consider, please share it in written form, telling me where your insights differ from or add to what is available from the Torah and Prophets.

Yada
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  
#73 Posted : Sunday, December 7, 2014 2:26:03 PM(UTC)
James
Joined: 10/23/2007(UTC)
Posts: 2,608
Man
Location: Texas

Thanks: 5 times
Was thanked: 208 time(s) in 146 post(s)
Y wrote:
Shabbat shalom brother Yada,

I just thought I'd introduce myself as I am reading your material and am enjoying it, though it does cause one to question their "beliefs" verses what they actually know. I spoke with R briefly and he gave me your email. R didn't seem very "friendly" at all points of contact but I think I'm just reading things in his words that weren't really there. At other times he seemed genuinely helpful. He mentioned something about ceasing communication if I followed the rabbis and the Talmud (haha) and I don't, though I wonder if there is some value to be found in their writings? Either way, I follow Yah according to the knowledge that I possess and do not get into the traditions of man or religious observance/rules.

I recall you saying you were part Lakota in a radio broadcast? My children and my wife are Lakota also so it was a pleasant coincidence to hear that.

There so many questions I want to ask you but I don't want to overload you, not to mention I haven't come close to finishing your book. It opens up so many lines of inquiry that it's hard not to bombard you with questions. I asked R why you pronounce the Father's name as "Yahuwah" and I didn't find his response very detailed. The best he could tell me (besides directing me to his website) is that it is pronounced according to the four semi-vowels. I did check out his website and I did read some of the material there, but most of it was a repeating of your own material, so I thought it would be better to go to the source for a better explanation.

People who speak Hebrew have their own idea (not rabbis) as to how His name is pronounced. Some of them have tended to talk down to me based on their being able to speak the language and me not being able to speak the language. I am aware that just speaking a language doesn't necessarily mean a person understand grammar. Would you mind giving me some information in regards to the pronunciation, in-depth, so that I could make a better decision as to the correct pronunciation?

This isn't about me arguing with you over the subject, I have a deep desire to know the Father's name and I want to be certain that I am pronouncing His name properly. Currently I call Him "Yahweh" and have read very good arguments to support such a pronunciation (Eliyah.com). I'm aware that some say it is the exact same pronunciation of "Jove" or Jupiter (in the Greek) but I have learned that there were alternate pronunciations of the vowels to counter such an argument.

Also, I have read some posts that question your words, mainly along the lines of saying that if knowledge was the prerequisite for salvation then most people would be kept out of the kingdom due to ignorance and limited intelligence (not able to understand the word without a guide, so to speak).

What are your thoughts on that question/accusation? I think knowledge is great and as you have said, language is our primary tool of communication. Yah used it so that we could know Him and heed His guidance and teachings. I find studying scripture to be awesomely fulfilling, even if I do not completely understand everything I'm reading. But what about those who do not have the mental capacity to do so on their own? Surely the Father is merciful and does overlook some instances of our ignorance, correct?

Have a great Shabbat and thank you,

-Y


Yada wrote:
Y,

R is one of the most giving and responsive individuals I've ever known so I suspect that you misinterpreted his affinity for being direct and concise. His life is an inspiration for many of us who know him. And his site has enlightened and enriched those searching for the truth the world over.

Yahowsha' held rabbis in extremely low regard. I oppose them and their religion. I would be careful studying anything that they say or write.

If you'll read the Name volume of www.IntroToGod.org you will understand why we pronounce YHWH Yahowah according to His Towrah teaching. There is no possibility according to the ToWRaH (note the pronunciation of the W and H) that the W is a consonant or that the final H is pronounced differently that the initial one, or that it is "eh" vs. "ah." It has nothing to do with speaking modern Hebrew, and everything to do with observing what Yahowah provided for us to read. There is no J in Hebrew nor a V so those pronunciations are also impossible.

Hebrew grammar is another subject entirely. It teaches us how to consider verbs from an eternal, relational, and volitional perceptive. I share what you need to know about Hebrew grammar in the Word volume of www.IntroToGod.org.

I am irrelevant and I never defend myself. I can't save you. My words are meaningless compared to Yahowah's. If you can study His in Hebrew, do so. If you can't, I'd encourage you to read my translations in www.YadaYah.com and www.IntroToGod.org until you are equipped to do so. These presentations of His Word will provide you with a useful foundation and helpful perspective. And while doing so, check the translations using free online Hebrew English dictionaries.

If knowing was not necessary, then there would be no purpose for the Towrah, the Prophets, or the Psalms. Revelation would be moot. So that is a ridiculous argument in support of ignorance. And Yahowah states that "My people are destroyed for lack of knowledge. So, I simply accept Yahowah's position on this and He is in complete accord with knowing and wholly opposed to ignorance.

Based upon what Yahowah has revealed, one in a million benefits from His mercy. And all of those who do, receive His mercy the same way - by observing the terms and conditions of His Covenant. Towrah means "teaching" after all.

You would be better served to let Yahowah deal with those who are mentally handicapped and continue to use the good mind God gave you to closely examine and carefully consider His Word. Once you come to know Him as He revealed Himself and come to understand what He is offering and what He expects, then you will be able to engage in His Covenant in accord with Yah's instructions. Once you have done that, then you can join us and share with others what you have learned from Yahowah.

Yahowah's mercy is not capricious. He does not change His requirements based upon our circumstances. If you want to know Him, you will have to invest the time and keep a receptive mind.

It will be a better use of your time to read www.YadaYah.com, www.IntroToGod.org, and www.QuestioningPaul.com than ask me questions that are better answered in these books by Yahowah. Once you have done so, you'll be equipped to study His Word on your own.

Yada
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  
#74 Posted : Monday, December 8, 2014 7:28:59 PM(UTC)
James
Joined: 10/23/2007(UTC)
Posts: 2,608
Man
Location: Texas

Thanks: 5 times
Was thanked: 208 time(s) in 146 post(s)
Y from above continues

Y wrote:
Shalom Yada,

I figured as much. Sometimes "direct and concise" can be misunderstood as "aggressive/cold", especially if one is oversensitive (my father was verbally abusive when I was growing up so I fall under the "oversensitive" category). I'm not a big fan of the so-called rabbis either so I stand in good company. After all, they murder people for saying the Father's name.

I understand that there is no "j" or "v" (I also noticed that Jewish people seem to inconsistently go between pronouncing words with "b" and "v". I guess they are interchangeable). Curiously, someone told me there is no "o" in Hebrew either, though I suspect that comes from the Masorete vowel pointing to cover up the proper pronunciation of names beginning in "Yahu". I could be wrong as I'm assuming.

I know you can't save me but you aren't irrelevant. I like to understand the person who is trying to guide me and others to the Father. I am studying Hebrew but it's slow going.

I'd like to know what resources you're using for your amplified translations? I've got a copy of Strong's exhaustive, Brown, Driver & Brigg's and other modules in my theWord Scripture's software program but they don't seem very exhaustive at all. Also, these men may have had a religious bias so I'm kind of weary as to how trustworthy they are. I've checked some of your work against their lexicons and their definitions seem sparse in comparison. Your definition of Yisra'el is pretty awesome and much more accurate then the Rabbinical idea, that man could "overcome" and defeat Yah. Your translation makes much more sense to me.

I've been thinking more about passages in your amplified translation. I even used one in the company of people during a Parshah and Midrash (I was just checking out this group of people out of curiosity because a rabbi was present. I learned some of their terms in order to be able to follow what they were up to) but it didn't go over very well, in fact it was met with silence. That kind of surprised me as I felt your translation brought the passage to light better then the Jewish Bible translation these people were using.

This confused me a bit, you wrote:

"Once you have done that, then you can join us and share with others what you have learned from Yahowah."

Do you encourage isolation before meeting others who are part of the family?

I appreciate your response. I plan on finishing your books.

Thank you,

-Y


Yada wrote:
Y,

Most every resource I use is listed in the prologues for www.YadaYah.com and www.IntroToGod.org. There is no single trustworthy dictionary or interlinear, but with a diligent use of many resources where every potential root and cognate is considered from the proper perspective a studious person can achieve a complete and accurate translation. It takes a lot of time, however, all of which is rewarded. And since I provide every Hebrew word for your consideration within the translations, you can verify their meaning for yourself - something I strongly encourage. And often, if there are many options, I walk the reader through the process of selecting the most reasonable choices.

There are 22 letters in the Hebrew alphabet, 5 of which are vowels. All four letters in Yahowah's name are vowels. The vowel "o" is most always supplied by the W, just as it is in towrah and shalowm, although on occasion, the W can be pronounced "u" or "oo." The H is pronounced "ah" 99 of 100 times. There is a b in Hebrew, as it is the second letter. It represents family and home. This is all explained in the Word section of Intro To God.

Yahowah's Towrah is the guide, not me. I am irrelevant and wish to remain insignificant. I don't know anything of value apart from what I've learned translating and contemplating Yahowah's Word. And I've consistently shared every word and every insight I've evaluated and discerned.

You misinterpreted my statement. My intent was to encourage you to read, to study, and to learn, so that you come to know and understand, before sharing your concerns. If you want personal responses to your questions before having done so, you may want to consider the Yada Yah Forum.

I have found that when individuals try to share before they have incorporated what they have leaned to the point that they can defend the understanding themselves, problems often arise. Also, you are best served to find the answers to your questions from Yahowah rather than by asking me. He answers every important question in His Word. You will grow faster and and better by learning directly from Him and not through me or anyone else. That is why I want you to check my translations for yourself. That is why I equip you to translate Yah's Word for yourself.

There are some 5000 pages of translations, and thoughts regarding them, in the three books I've provided freely to you online. If you still have questions after reading a substantial portion of them, I'd be pleased to do my best to provide you with additional answers to questions not addressed therein, providing the opportunity for both of us to learn.

Yada

I try to be direct and concise, too, even though I also suffered under an abusive father. Yahowah is also direct and concise. You could say that He is blunt and uncompromising.


Y wrote:
Shalom,

I won't bother you after this (and after I've read more of your work on the Father) and I appreciate your patience in guiding me. Yes, I am aware of beyt or the home in the Hebrew alphabet. I was just curious why I would hear a rabbi say "Avraham" or "Ya'acov" yet at the same time they say "Laban" or other words represented with a "v" as a "b" sound. Maybe I should address the question to them rather then you since they made the change (I believe Yiddish somehow carried over to the Hebrew).

I've also heard some black people saying "shalum" instead of shalom which brought about a little confusion, since I have heard you say "shalom". The reason for the confusion stems from them calling the diminished Yah "Yahusha" which seems to be very close to "Yahowsha". I'm familiar with "yasha" yet I recall you mentioning something about Hoshea so I figured they were closely linked, or both coming from "salvation, save, deliverer, etc." (yasha). Then when studying the modern Hebrew grammar it all becomes on huge mess.

So thus far it seems like the "waw" or "vav" can be expressed as an "o", "u", and a "w", is that accurate? I'm setting up my keyboard for Hebrew phonetically. It's a little difficult because some Hebrew letters/characters double up on one English equivalent.
Yada wrote:
You misinterpreted my statement. My intent was to encourage you to read, to study, and to learn, so that you come to know and understand, before sharing your concerns. If you want personal responses to your questions before having done so, you may want to consider the Yada Yah Forum.


I registered a few weeks ago and still haven't received a confirmation email from you or whoever runs the site Yada, or I would have definitely asked some questions there. I'm not sure why I haven't received a confirmation. I just assumed you were very busy ( I believe I registered using this email too)

Yada wrote:
You will grow faster and and better by learning directly from Him and not through me or anyone else. That is why I want you to check my translations for yourself. That is why I equip you to translate Yah's Word for yourself.


I'm beginning to see the wisdom in that statement. It's easy to get turned around following someone instead of digging into the word yourself.

Yada wrote:
There are some 5000 pages of translations, and thoughts regarding them, in the three books I've provided freely to you online. If you still have questions after reading a substantial portion of them, I'd be pleased to do my best to provide you with additional answers to questions not addressed therein, providing the opportunity for both of us to learn.


I will definitely have questions, no doubt about that, I'm just a bit apprehensive asking certain questions. Sometimes (most of the times it seems) people get defensive and they feel like you're attacking them rather then just trying to understand a subject deeply. Sometimes hard questions need to be asked to show whether or not the one being asked really has turned over every rock in their quest for truth. Asking questions does one of two things, it either strengthens the truth of both individuals or it reveals flaws in the logic and research of the other. I have to be honest, sometimes I feel like I'm running around in circles. I feel like the man James describes as a wave tossed by the wind. Not exactly a flattering description of myself, hence the reason to deeply study the Word.

Yada wrote:
I try to be direct and concise, too, even though I also suffered under an abusive father. Yahowah is also direct and concise. You could say that He is blunt and uncompromising.


Maybe I'm still suffering from the Christian influence as I feel like our Father is full of mercy and love? On the other hand I fear Him greatly. One just has to read the curses found in "Leviticus" (Called Out" Is that right?) to show He is indeed blunt and uncompromising. He isn't exactly the the Teddy bear Christians want to make Him appear to be, whether in His spiritual form or when He walked among us in human flesh.

Again, thanks brother. I really do appreciate you taking the time to help me out.

-Yahuchanan. (Yah-oo-chanan?) :-)


Yada wrote:
Y,

While a curiosity that I address in ITG, it doesn't much matter why Rabbis corrupted their language with the addition of a "v" sound, an obvious corruption of the b. I won't argue that the possibility exists that the W is sometimes pronounced "u," but it is far less common than "o," and highly unlikely in Yahowah's name for the reasons you will read in the Name volume of www.IntroToGod.org.

The "Black Jews" movement is dangerous. Be careful. They promote some very strange beliefs which are inconsistent with Yahowah's Word. In this regard, they are similar to the "Hebrew Roots" movement and "Messianics," blending elements of the truth with their own religious deceptions.

Questions are good, and necessary, but since Yahowah is the only source of reliable answers, it's best that you find answers to your questions by observing His Word. There is no important question He does not answer. And frankly, listening to Him if more enjoyable and far more beneficial than listening to me. The translations and insights in the books will get you started and pointed in the right direction. You will be equipped to converse directly with the Author in due time.

Christianity is a horrible delusion and yes, like most of us you will have to let go of its misconceptions to truly know and understand Yahowah. I was once a Christian, but now hate the religion. The Christian god isn't remotely like the real one. His mercy is for thousands, and thus one in a million. I hope that you learn why and become one of the beneficiaries.

The truth is vastly better than the religious deceptions you are beginning to question. And I am confident that if you continue to study, you will come to love Yah as I do. He is the perfect Father in every possible way.

I don't think that there is a reason for an email confirmation to participate in the Forum. But since I'm not an administrator, I've cc'd James on this email.

Y
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  
#75 Posted : Tuesday, December 9, 2014 4:16:33 PM(UTC)
James
Joined: 10/23/2007(UTC)
Posts: 2,608
Man
Location: Texas

Thanks: 5 times
Was thanked: 208 time(s) in 146 post(s)
Continue from above.

Y wrote:
Yada,

I just got finished reading some your work and the translation (which is blowing my mind) of Shemowth 29:18. I'm a bit angry too, considering the translators have pulled the wool over my eyes and millions of others. They have dumbed down, obfuscated, butchered, and have hidden the word of Yahuwah. I could go on but you're way more aware of it then I am. I was struggling with some of the things you wrote early on but decided to keep an open mind based on past experiences and I'm glad I did. I just don't get it though, why would these men butcher His word to such an extent unless it was due to complete ignorance, or worse, totally done on purpose? And if the latter then by what spirit? I really don't feel very knowledgeable about the scriptures in this moment but dare I say these men were led by ha-Satan?

I'll keep on reading and hopefully, understanding will follow.

(I've been jumping around. I read some of Questioning Paul and some other parts of your work. I decided the day before yesterday to go through the material in order, hence the Shemowth 29:18 bomb being dropped on me tonight, truly fantastic).

Thanks (in regards to the forum and your book).

-Y


Yada wrote:
There are thousands more like it. Religious translations are essentially worthless and often counterproductive. Yahowah speaks clearly and truthfully. All we have to do is consider what He actually revealed.

We are all angry at those who have deliberately misled billions on behalf of their religions.

Yada Yah proves that Yahowah exists and that He is God. It presents His testimony in the order He revealed it. The creation account, the stories of Eden and the Flood, the presentation of the Covenant are enlightening and edifying, as is the volume on salvation.

The Intro to God takes a different approach and builds a foundation while providing the proper perspective to consider Yahowah's testimony. All the while it presents the seven topics most important to God and thus us, while providing you with the tools to listen to Him own your own.

Questioning Paul has a singular purpose: to destroy the credibility of the founder of the Christian religion. Until a person begins to question their religion and is willing to let go of its myths, it's hard if not impossible to know the truth. Religion is opposed to evidence and reason, and those are Yahowah's favorite tools.
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 Sarah  
#76 Posted : Wednesday, December 10, 2014 11:41:11 AM(UTC)
Sarah
Joined: 11/4/2012(UTC)
Posts: 103
Location: Colorado

Thanks: 7 times
Was thanked: 1 time(s) in 1 post(s)
The 14th day at sunset . . .

Wouldn't that be at the beginning of the 14th day, which would be dark/sunset. The end of the 14th day, at sunset, would actually be the 15th day.

If unleavened bread is to be eaten starting ON the 14th day through the 21st day, that would be 8 days.

On the other hand, Yahowsha died at 3:00 pm on Passover. That would place the sacrifice of the Lamb "between the evenings" - between 12:00 Noon and 6:00 pm/sunset.
Offline James  
#77 Posted : Wednesday, December 10, 2014 4:04:06 PM(UTC)
James
Joined: 10/23/2007(UTC)
Posts: 2,608
Man
Location: Texas

Thanks: 5 times
Was thanked: 208 time(s) in 146 post(s)
Sarah the instructions for Pesach in Shemowth 12:6 say that the lamb was to be slaughtered Byn ha‘erebiym, litterally between the evenings.

For anyone interested here is an exchange I have been having with Yada on this exact topic.

James wrote:
Yada,

I have a question about Pesach. I know timing of the miqra is not your favorite subject, but timing is a small part of the question.

According to Shemowth 12:6 the lamb was to be slaughtered on the 14th between the eves/erebs. The question is what do you think between the eves is, and more importantly why that specific time as opposed to just saying on the 14th.

From what I have gathered there are four possibilities for between the eves.
1)Between the time sun sets and the time the sun rises, ie the start of the day.

2)Between the time the sun rises and the time the sun sets, ie the middle of the day or the portion of the say with light in the sky.

3)Between the time the sun starts to set and the time it completely sets, noon until sundown.

4)Between the time the sun starts to rise and the time it is starts to set, sun up until noon.

It seems no matter which understanding is applied however that the Greek text are contradictory. If the meal that Yahowsha ate with the disciples was the Pesach then his sacrifice was at the wrong time of the day. The Greek text indicates that what he ate with them was the Pesach which either means:
A)That the Jews of the day were keeping and wrong, and Yahowha didn’t correct them,

B)Yahowsha was not sacrificed at the appropriate time,

C)The Greek text is errant,

D)Or I am misunderstanding what is written.

D is a distinct possibility, B is impossible and A is highly unlikely. I am inclined to C, but I am open to D if someone can show me where I am wrong.

If we are to assume that the Greek text accurately records the time of Yahowsha’s sacrifice then number one above is out as a possibility for the meaning of between the eves. If my understanding of the Greek text is correct that places the timing of Yahowsha’s sacrifice sometime in the afternoon of the 14th day eliminating option four. So that leaves us with option two or three.

Both two and three are in accord with the timing in the Towrah. We are told in Shemowth 12 that Yahowah smote the firstborn at midnight, and that Pharaoh released them upon waking to discover the dead. The Israelites left right away, not even allowing the dough to leaven. We are told in Ba’midbar 33:3 that they departed on the 15th day of the month. So if the lamb were slain the afternoon of the 14th Yahowah would have come at midnight on the 15th and the Israelites would have left that morning.

Based on the timing of Shemowth and Ba’midbar as well as Yahowsha having to fulfill the miqra at the right time to be the perfect lamb, we can say that the “last supper” was not the Pesach. Furthermore Jews the world over today celebrate their Seder the wrong night, and indeed I have been keeping it wrong.

So with option two and three being the only ones in accord with both the Towrah timing and the time of Yahowsha’s sacrifice, the question becomes why the specific timing. Symbolism is not my strong suite so I am open to being wrong here, or partially accurate while missing a ton, but here are my thoughts.
The two have in common that the sacrifice would occur during day light thus open for all to see. All the symbolism of light in Scripture would apply, including the greater luminary becoming visible, etc.

In addition if the lamb were sacrificed during the day or afternoon period that means the lamb would most likely be consumed at supper time which means the meal would begin sometime near the setting of the sun and continue into the darkness thus the Pesach meal would bleed right into Matsah. This design would be perfect in that it would be nearly impossible to benefit from Pesach without also benefiting from Matsah.

Those are the only two things that come to my mind, but again I’m not the best with symbolism. Does this timing make sense to you? If not let me know what I am missing. Can you see any other symbolism, or any other reasons Yah would have specified that timing?

Thanks,
James


Yada wrote:
JB,

We have rendered byn differently as well as 'ereb. I prefer to translate byn along the lines of "understanding" based upon "making the connections between things" than simply "between." Also, while we do not have any part of Shemowth 12 extant from the DSS, in the MT 'ereb is in the dual form, not plural, so it probably isn't "between the eves." The dual form only indicates that more than one thing may be associated. Hand, for example, is in the dual form and can thus mean one or both, but is usually translated singular. Zarow'ah is another dual form without a plural.

“And he shall be for you, existing on your behalf (wa hayah la), to be kept, cared for, and observed (la mishmereth – to be watched over as your responsibly) until (‘ad) the fourteenth (‘asar ‘arba’) day (yowm) of this (la zeh) month (ha chodesh – time of renewal).

And (wa) the entire (kol) community (qahal – assembly) of witnesses (‘edah – who provide testimony on behalf) of the Children (ben – sons) of Yisra’el (yisra’el – individuals who engage and endure with God) shall take his life (shahat ‘eth – shall slaughter him) to encourage understanding around (byn / bayn – to promote understanding near or in the vicinity of) sundown (‘ereb – sunset, twilight, dusk, or early evening).” (Shemowth / Names / Exodus 12:6)


These things considered, some of your concerns no longer exist.

As for Yahowsha', I've concluded that the ambiguity over Pesach was conceived to allow Him to eat the Passover meal at the designated time and still serve as the Passover Lamb before the conclusion of Pesach. It would be impossible for Him to serve as the lamb at the meal He ate with His disciples. I suspect that the day beginning and ending at sundown was established for this very reason.

So I don't see any of this as a timing problem. I think He ate the meal at the right time, that He fulfilled the Dany'el prophecy precisely, and that He served as the Pesach Lamb on Passover.

Yada


James wrote:
Yada,

I really like the bayn/byn connection I had not considered it and Yah is all about promoting understanding. That said I have to disagree somewhat. ‘ereb as a masculine noun would have the standard ‘ym, yod mem, ending to pluralize it which is what we see here. The difference between the dual form and the plural form is an accent mark over the last letter, a Masoretic addition that would not have been used in the original. So ‘erebiym would be the plural form of ‘ereb, and there would be no dual form in the original. So it would still be evenings.

Byn ha’erebiym is a phrase used in 11 verses. 5 of them are in relation to Pesach. The others are mostly in relation to two lambs being prepared one in the morning and the other Byn ha‘erebiym.

The exception being Shemowth 16:12 where Yah says that He gave them meat to eat byn ha’erebiym and bread for in the morning.

All of the verses speaking of the two lambs use the same phrasing that the First lamb was to be prepared in the morning and the second Byn ha‘erebiym. So dropping the between aspect of byn for the moment and going with the bayn aspect there is still an element of timing to it, and since the first was in the boqar, morning, and the second was Byn ha‘erebiym we can conclude that Byn ha‘erebiym refers to the evening ending a day and not the one beginning a day.

While the “to encourage understanding around (byn / bayn – to promote understanding near or in the vicinity of) sundown (‘ereb – sunset, twilight, dusk, or early evening).” Rendering could fit in most if not all the uses, it still doesn’t explain the plural use of ‘erebiym furthermore timing is being indicated in all 6 non Pesach verses namely the distinction between something being performed in the morning and something byn ha’erebiym, which inclines me to think that the phrase is meant to convey a specific time of the day, namely the period where the sun starts to set ending the day. Even with the bayn understanding rendering there is still an element of timing to it.

So while I like the encourage understanding aspect and idea, the timing aspect seems to be just as important.

I think the phrase would best be rendered “to encourage understanding between (byn / bayn – to promote understanding between) the evenings (‘erebym – the time between when the sun begins to set and it fully sets ending the day).”

Furthermore Shemowth 12:10 says that none of the lamb was to remain until morning. If the Pesach was eaten the night starting the 14th then none remaining until morning would mean that when the sun rose on the 14th none of the lamb was to remain. If however the lamb was eaten as the 14th ended then none remaining until morning would mean that when the sun rose on the 15th none of the lamb was to remain. The second timing is consistent with Yahowsha’s fulfilment.
This would also sync with 12:18-19 and the evening of the 14th until the evening of the 21st being 7 days that you would eat unleavened bread. You would start as you eat the Pesach as the sun sets near the end of the 14th day and would continue until the sun set ending the 21st day.

The timing also syncs with the Shemowth account of the first Pesach. The Hebrews according to 12:22 ate the Pesach in their houses after painting the door posts with blood and were instructed not to leave until morning. Then upon waking and witnessing the dead the Pharaoh sent the Hebrews out, which we are told in Bamidbar 33 was on the 15th meaning they spent the end of the 14th and start of the 15th eating the Pesach in their homes which would mean that they slaughtered the Pesach at some point during the day of the 14th.

So neither the Shemowth dress rehearsal nor the Yahowsha fulfilment fit with the start of the 14th practice. Also the “last supper” account does not fit as being a Pesach: why was no lamb mentioned? Lamb was at the center of Pesach but Yahowsha never mentions it. Only wine and bread were mentioned and spoken of, wine is not a part of the Pesach in the Towrah. The other instruction concerning food at Pesach is bitter herbs which are also not mentioned. So Yahowsha only speaks of 1 of the 3 things Yah instructed as part of the Pesach meal.

Looking at the oldest Greek manuscripts no references to Passover are extant in them. The closest is that Mat 26:19 is extant in P37, but only two words are actually readable in it and Passover isn’t one of them. So it seems to me it is entirely possible that there was no mention of Pesach in the original text, and the meal Yahowsha ate with the disciples was just a normal meal that He took advantage of to explain what was about to happen.

Yahowah spoke of the lamb being slaughtered at a specific time of the day be it between the evenings or near the evening. I don’t see him doing this without a reason. And while I don’t see Yah rejecting us for not keeping Pesach at a specific time I think it is important to try to understand what the specific time is and why He choose it.


James


I have not heard back on the second meail, but will share it when I do. Also interested in others opinions here 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 Steve in PA  
#78 Posted : Wednesday, December 10, 2014 4:53:45 PM(UTC)
Steve in PA
Joined: 3/31/2010(UTC)
Posts: 157
Location: PA

Was thanked: 4 time(s) in 3 post(s)
James, I agree with your reasoning in your second response. They may have broke bread at the beginning of the 14th day: I just don't see how that could be the Pesach meal. I also don't see how or why Yahowsha' would need to or have to celebrate the Pesach meal with His disciples that day especially since He was the lamb slaughtered. The Pesach meal being eaten at the start of Matsah just makes sense and fits the timing.
Offline James  
#79 Posted : Thursday, December 11, 2014 8:56:29 AM(UTC)
James
Joined: 10/23/2007(UTC)
Posts: 2,608
Man
Location: Texas

Thanks: 5 times
Was thanked: 208 time(s) in 146 post(s)
Yeah, as I see it the only rub with that view comes from the fact that the Greek text, at least to me, indicate that Yahowsha ate the Pesach with the disciples. But I don't really trust the Greek text. Yahowsha lived the Pesach, so he did not need to eat it to be an example for us. And since there is a time of day element to Pesach it seems impossible for Him to do both.

I have yet to see anything that conflicts with the end of the 14th day concept, and until I do I am going to start keeping it this way. I'm open to being wrong I just can't seem to find anything to indicate that I am.
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 Sarah  
#80 Posted : Friday, December 12, 2014 5:56:45 PM(UTC)
Sarah
Joined: 11/4/2012(UTC)
Posts: 103
Location: Colorado

Thanks: 7 times
Was thanked: 1 time(s) in 1 post(s)
I agree; it seems that the Passover meal should occur late in the day on the 14th. Just a thought here: on Passover in 33 CE there were 2 "evenings" - one beginning at Noon and lasting about 3 hours (darkness over the earth when the stars were visible) then light, and then sunset at 6 pm. That is the only day in history where a single 24-hour day would have two periods of darkness.

I am wondering if the wine at the meal was added to the text to correlate with Paul, or the wine was part of a regular, non-Passover meal. I assume they drank wine at every evening meal.

Also, according to DSS studies, the Qumran (Ya'qob) group used a lunar/solar calendar and the Temple group used a lunar calendar.

Thanks for your response!
Offline James  
#81 Posted : Friday, December 12, 2014 6:14:45 PM(UTC)
James
Joined: 10/23/2007(UTC)
Posts: 2,608
Man
Location: Texas

Thanks: 5 times
Was thanked: 208 time(s) in 146 post(s)
Originally Posted by: Sarah Go to Quoted Post
I agree; it seems that the Passover meal should occur late in the day on the 14th. Just a thought here: on Passover in 33 CE there were 2 "evenings" - one beginning at Noon and lasting about 3 hours (darkness over the earth when the stars were visible) then light, and then sunset at 6 pm. That is the only day in history where a single 24-hour day would have two periods of darkness.

I am wondering if the wine at the meal was added to the text to correlate with Paul, or the wine was part of a regular, non-Passover meal. I assume they drank wine at every evening meal.

Also, according to DSS studies, the Qumran (Ya'qob) group used a lunar/solar calendar and the Temple group used a lunar calendar.

Thanks for your response!


Interesting point about the two periods of darkness in 33. I would point out that anytime there is a total eclipse of the sun then there is an additional period of darkness in a day.

I image the wine was a part of pretty much every meal, that was the practice in most of the world.

From my studies the lunar/solar calendars are very convoluted and have no scriptural basis. It's the lunar/solar calendar idea that leads to the lunar based Sabbath which falls apart after a little study on the topic.
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 cgb2  
#82 Posted : Saturday, December 27, 2014 10:12:42 AM(UTC)
cgb2
Joined: 5/14/2010(UTC)
Posts: 689
Location: Colorado

Thanks: 16 times
Was thanked: 23 time(s) in 17 post(s)
After deep study of this and trying to harmonize everything with no conflicts:

The "Last supper" was not the pesach (lamb). They left the house and went on a "watch".

Exo 12:6 And ye shall keepH1961 H4931 it up untilH5704 the fourteenthH702 H6240 dayH3117 of the sameH2088 month:H2320 and the wholeH3605 assemblyH6951 of the congregationH5712 of IsraelH3478 shall killH7819 it inH996 the evening.H6153

H4931
משׁמרת
mishmereth
BDB Definition:
1) guard, charge, function, obligation, service, watch
1a) guard, watch, house of detention or confinement
1b) keeping, preserving
1c) charge, injunction
1d) office, function (ceremonial)
Part of Speech: noun feminine

Mat 26:40 And He came to the taught ones and found them asleep, and said to Kĕpha, “So, were you not able to watch with Me one hour?


This is a bad translation and should be "And BEFORE the first day of UB..."
Mat 26:17 And on the first day of Unleavened Bread the taught ones came to יהושע, saying to Him, “Where do You wish us to prepare for You to eat the Passover?” (ref http://www.thewaytoyahuw...rsion1/matthew#chapter26 )

And the "last supper" being pesach totally messes up the teaching, especially going into UB and its significance. Also contradicts this:

Num 33:1 These are the departures of the children of Yisra’ĕl, who went out of the land of Mitsrayim by their divisions under the hand of Mosheh and Aharon.
Num 33:2 And Mosheh wrote down the starting points of their departures at the command of יהוה, and these are their departures according to their starting points:
Num 33:3 So they departed from Raʽmeses in the first month, on the fifteenth day of the first month, on the morrow of the Passover the children of Yisra’ĕl went out with boldness before the eyes of all the Mitsrites,
Num 33:4 and the Mitsrites were burying all their first-born, whom יהוה had smitten among them. Also on their mighty ones יהוה had executed judgments.
Num 33:5 Then the children of Yisra’ĕl departed from Raʽmeses and camped at Sukkoth.

Between the evenings, I take to mean between noon and dark (around 3pm - ninth hour). Daylight would have been sunup "first hour", "noon" sixth hour, going into sundown "12th hour". Slaughtering the lamb around 3pm on the 14th day would give ample roasting time to be ready to feast going into UB. UB Symbolizing redemption too.

Mat 27:45 And from the sixth hour there was darkness over all the land, until the ninth hour.
Mat 27:46 And about the ninth hour יהושע cried out with a loud voice, saying, “Ěli, Ěli, lemah sheḇaqtani?” that is, “My Ěl, My Ěl, why have You forsaken Me?”



thanks 1 user thanked cgb2 for this useful post.
matt on 12/29/2014(UTC)
Offline cgb2  
#83 Posted : Saturday, December 27, 2014 10:27:20 AM(UTC)
cgb2
Joined: 5/14/2010(UTC)
Posts: 689
Location: Colorado

Thanks: 16 times
Was thanked: 23 time(s) in 17 post(s)
Moreover...I think "Pesach" being thought of as a day, instead of the lamb, lends greatly to the confusion and is not supported by scripture:

Exo 12:6 ‘And you shall keep it until the fourteenth day of the same month. Then all the assembly of the congregation of Yisra’ĕl shall kill it between the evenings.
Exo 12:7 ‘And they shall take some of the blood and put it on the two doorposts and on the lintel of the houses where they eat it.
Exo 12:8 ‘And they shall eat the flesh on that night, roasted in fire – with unleavened bread and with bitter herbs they shall eat it.
Exo 12:9 ‘Do not eat it raw, nor boiled at all with water, but roasted in fire, its head with its legs and its inward parts.
Exo 12:10 ‘And do not leave of it until morning, and what remains of it until morning you are to burn with fire.
Exo 12:11 ‘And this is how you eat it: your loins girded, your sandals on your feet, and your staff in your hand. And you shall eat it in haste. It is the Passover of יהוה.

Some more affirming they departed at sunup UB:
Exo 12:17 ‘And you shall guard the Festival of Unleavened Bread, for on this same day I brought your divisions out of the land of Mitsrayim. And you shall guard this day throughout your generations, an everlasting law.
Exo 12:18 ‘In the first month, on the fourteenth day of the month, in the evening, you shall eat unleavened bread until the twenty-first day of the month in the evening.
Exo 12:19 ‘For seven days no leaven is to be found in your houses, for if anyone eats what is leavened, that same being shall be cut off from the congregation of Yisra’ĕl, whether sojourner or native of the land.

Another thing that really gets messed up is "do I eat matza for 8 days or 7 days?" LOL ;)

The "simpler" theory with fewer (or less onerous) assumptions is probably the most appropriate one. - Occam's razor
thanks 1 user thanked cgb2 for this useful post.
matt on 12/29/2014(UTC)
Offline James  
#84 Posted : Tuesday, December 30, 2014 10:44:25 AM(UTC)
James
Joined: 10/23/2007(UTC)
Posts: 2,608
Man
Location: Texas

Thanks: 5 times
Was thanked: 208 time(s) in 146 post(s)
DT wrote:
Yada,

I guess trying to bring my family along is not going to work. My RCC brother is looked up to as the patriarch of the family, this is why I started with him in the first place. The result is the opposite of what I thought might happen. My brother is highly educated, and is well trained in debate actually knowing how to use all the rules. As you can see evidence including the very words of the God he claims his church was given authority to rule under have no meaning.

Looking back I don't know how I thought I would be able to get through to him. The RCC basically says the moment Jesus handed the keys to the kingdom to Peter their first pope, they as a faith were allowed to change everything, to the degree what they have created is in complete opposition to Yah's will. So how this new faith system is the only means to salvation, with all the miracles to prove the claim.

As to my brothers reference to my marriage and family, well he and my wife's pastor had a great hand in driving a wedge through my credibility. Religion will gladly forget their differences to keep the faith intact.

My wife and I are not going to break up, but my religious wedding vows did not also include the forfeiture of my soul.

The family traditions concerning all things Christian run so deep my family (except my son) simply cannot extract themselves from their practice. This year I told my wife going in I would not participate in any religious part of any event. When the prayers start I am not going to be in the room. I put all the decorating on her (normally she does it all anyway) I did bring in the tree, and enjoy the dinners as a family event. Lucky the rest of her siblings are not religious at all dinner at their house in the past always required me to give the prayer as they are not religious. This year there was no prayer, from any one.

I am writing for two reasons, first to say you were right, there is no changing Christians one can only put the words out there and hope reason takes over.

The second reason was in the hope you might have some insight into how I could create the same relationship you have with your spouse. Not in the person department, my wife and I could easily repair the damage between us, with truce of sorts. I guess I am hoping for some magic verse that might want here to leave the tree out of the picture and create a more secular event in place of Christmas. Nice thing Easter is all about eggs and bunnies she doesn't haul out a giant bloody cross to put on the front lawn as one of her church friends does each season.

DT to M wrote:
Hi M,


To continue our conversation apart from the emotions of women. Would you agree that if Yahowah through His prophets and Torah chided His people and subsequently anyone who desires not to be separated from God, that we in this age should listen? Could we say changing pagan ways to Christian traditions by religious minded men to cover over the festivals of Yahowah might fall into that category?


Of course you don't want my opinions on this subject, here are the words of authority on the subject.
Deuteronomy 18:9
"When you enter the land which Yahowah your God gives you, you must not learn to imitate the detestable things of those nations."
Can we say honoring the messiah on the same date as all previous pagan gods, of these the Jews whored after? These are the deities Yahowah hates, yes?

Or how about erasing His personal name 7000 times from scripture and instead creating a vowel pointing system as the Masoretic Rabbis did to obscure the name YHWH and replace it with LORD?
Let's examine what Yahowah thinks about this; Hosea ’ 2:16-17“And it shall be in that specific day, prophetically declares Yahowah, you shall encounter and welcome Me as an individual; and you will not call Me ‘My Lord’ ever again. For I will remove, accordingly the Lords’ (ha Ba’alym) names of her mouth, and they shall not be remembered, recalled, or mentioned by their name ever again.”

Exodus 20:7
- "You should never deceive or delude through the Name or reputation of Yahowah your God, advancing worthless and lifeless deceptions. For indeed, Yahowah will never forgive nor leave unpunished those who consistently deceive, actually beguile, and habitually delude in association with His Name, to promote and effect vain and ineffectual lies which lead to lifelessness and destruction."

Jeremiah 10:1-4
Hear the word which Yahowah speaks to you, O house of Isra'el. Thus says Yahowah, "Do not learn the way of the nations, and do not be terrified by the signs of heaven (even though the nations are terrified by them). For the customs of the people are delusion. It is wood cut from the forest, the work of the hands of a craftsman with a cutting tool! They decorate with silver and with gold, they fasten it with nails and with hammers so that it will not totter."

As to why I reject most of what has become the traditions of Christianity from the song lyrics recorded in Psalm 119:59,60
I considered the merit of my ways,
and then I turned my feet and steps
to God's witness and testimony.
I am coming quickly
—without hesitation, reservation, or question—
to observe, to focus upon, to consider, and to embrace
the terms and conditions of Your relationship agreement.

Below is a story from 2 Kings of a king who got it right.
Kings 23:1-7
The king summoned all the leaders of Yahudah and Yarushalaim. The king went up to the House of Yahowah, accompanied by all the people of Yahudah, all the residents of Yarushalaim, the priests, and the prophets. All the people were there, from the youngest to the oldest.

He read aloud all the words of the scroll of the Covenant that had been discovered in the House of Yahowah.

The king stood by the pillar and renewed the Covenant before Yahowah, agreeing to follow Yahowah and to observe His teachings, instructions, and prescriptions for living with all his heart and being, by carrying out the terms of the Covenant recorded on this scroll. All the people agreed to keep the Covenant.

The king ordered the high priest, Hilkiyahu, the priests of the second order, and the doorkeepers to bring out of the House of Yahowah all the items that were used in the worship of the LORD(literally, ha Ba'al), of Asherah, and of all the stars in the sky. The king burned them outside of Yarushalaim in the terraces of Qidron, and he carried their ashes to Beyth El.

He executed the pagan priests whom the kings of Yahudah had appointed to offer sacrifices upon the steeples in the cities of Yahudah and in the area right around Yarushalaim. (They offered sacrifices to the LORD, to the sun god, to the moon god, to the constellations, and to all the stars in the sky.)

He removed the Asherah pole from the House of Yahowah and took it outside Yarushalaim to the Qidron Valley, where he burned it. He smashed it to dust and then threw the dust into the public graveyard.

He tore down the quarters of the sodomites in the House of Yahowah, where women were weaving hanging decorations for the Asherah tree.

Btw, Asherah is the god also known as "Easter" here pagans celebrate her impregnation by the sun and gives birth to the son of the sun-god on Dec. 25 nine months later, Asherah is also known as the mother of god and queen of the universe. Sound at all familiar to you? Maybe these traditions rang well with the Treacy's before and after there conversion to Christianity?

Upon His return Yahowah stated He will reestablish His throne in the line of David a great honor for the man who wrote the words below concerning the teachings of Yahowah.
Hebrew words in parentheses with all definitions, tell me this verse does not mean what the collection of meanings convey. Btw, this is not me translating, these are directly out of a Hebrew dictionary. So the meanings are correct, the only thing you could argue is the sentence structure is incorrect, however this was taken from what was translated in the English bibles we have on hand. Read this verse in an English bible, you will see Law in place of Torah, Yahowah in the ancient Hebrew pictographic characters would be YHWH vowel pointed to read LORD etc..

If God is the same yesterday, today, and tomorrow His plan could not have changed. If He gave your pope the right to change all why not out of Christian spirit declare all to be saved? Why make a system completely different then what was said to be eternal changing everything? Literally everything was changed from the rest days to the festivals. So why bother with the Psalms, Prophets, and even the messiah? Just decree a single man from the beginning of time as the master of the souls of all?
Psalm 19:7
Yahowah’s (YHWH in Paleo-Hebrew, 66x21) Torah (torah – teaching, guidance, direction, and instruction) is complete and entirely perfect (tamym – without defect, lacking nothing, correct, genuine, right, helpful, beneficial, and true), returning and restoring (suwb – transforming) the soul (nepesh – consciousness). Yahowah's testimony ('eduwth – restoring and eternal witness) 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 and receptive (pethy – easy for those who are receptive).


DT

P.S. if in the year 2026 the SHTF you might want to hustle over here and read the two volumes of Yada Yah which will be dog eared but on my bookshelf. 2500 pages of similar translation with commentary.


M to DT wrote:
DT,

I love you.

We can discourse about the oligarchy which has been running America since Wilson.

Running up debt as “do-gooder” politicians one after another discovered they could build an expanding political base by offering the citizens in America a “chicken in every pot” has left us in a precarious position financially today.

Discussing Old Testament passages as if they have relevance today is pointless and more importantly irrelevant to me.

I am a Catholic.

My salvation comes through Jesus Christ. He founded my Church. He left it in good hands. The message has been consistent and universal. It does not rely on a book. It relies on Tradition and the Magisterium--a sort of three legged stool with Scripture as just one part.

I have been to Rome. I have seen the archeology with my own eyes. I read the request for a divorce which Henry VIII sent with Cardinal John Wolsey to obtain Henry’s divorce from Queen Catherine.

The role of the Roman Catholic Church in religious history is like a set of railroad tracks through time to Jesus.

I will no longer respond to any e-mail in which you will reference these Old Testament passages.

I would only add, from my own observation, you are alienating yourself from your family. You made a promise before God to love honor and cherish your wife. These Old Testament interpretations you are citing are undermining your relationship with everyone you swore a covenant before God to protect 30 years ago. I would mull this contradiction over before it is too late. The God I believe in would not require a repudiation of an earlier covenant to follow him. This is what men.

M


Yada wrote:
DT,

Religious faith causes its victims to be wholly opposed to evidence and reason, especially when the testimony comes from Yahowah. The citation "Discussing Old Testament passages as if they have relevance today is pointless and more importantly irrelevant to me. I am a Catholic." says it all, especially when stated as a response to Psalm 19.7. Roman Catholicism is the Beast that tramples the world in Daniel.

Be kind to your wife and be true to your God. Observe the Towrah. Engage in the Covenant. As you said, your religious marriage vows did not include the fortitude of your soul. Tell your wife as I have told mine, that there are hundreds of ways to prove beyond any doubt that Christianity is false and hundreds more to prove conclusively that Yahowah's testimony can be trusted. If she is interested, share them. If not, then all you can do is live your life in the light of the Towrah and continue to grow.

Yada
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  
#85 Posted : Monday, January 26, 2015 8:46:46 AM(UTC)
James
Joined: 10/23/2007(UTC)
Posts: 2,608
Man
Location: Texas

Thanks: 5 times
Was thanked: 208 time(s) in 146 post(s)
W wrote:
Yada,

First off, I appreciate you brother and all you do to help us out. I was wondering if you wouldn't mind going over the translation you shared on this past Shabat Study program? I'll be honest, I'm lost on this one. The first thing that popped into my mind after you shared, were words you've echoed in the past, If Yah changes He wouldn't be reliable, how could one trust Him if He changes His Word. I really am confused on this, I've obviously misunderstood something but I can't seem to pin point what it is?


Respectfully,

W


Yada wrote:
W,

I don't understand why some think that this was a change. This instruction is provided in the same Towrah that explained what was what and was not healthy. It didn't come later. The two presentations cover different concerns - what's healthy and what's permissible.Therefore, by combining all that the Towrah instructs regarding meat, so long as we value Yah, observe and act upon His Covenant and Invitations, and are thoughtful about what we are doing, we can eat most anything we want, fully aware that there is greater risk to our mortal health when we eat certain meats.

I think Yah is opposed to the Rabbinical religious fixation on Kosher. And He doesn't want our reaction to food cause others to presume that the Towrah is actually a set of restrictive laws to obey. His advice is perfect when He explains what is healthy and what is permissible.

Relax. Enjoy. Be happy. Be free. And avoid being religious/obedient. Our Father isn't restrictive or a kill joy.

While I was uncomfortable discussing it, I have never seen the instruction on food (Qara' 11 and Dabarym 14) to be laws to obey but instead teaching to learn from and be guided by. This was affirmed during our study of what Yah had to say regarding what was good for us to eat. It is also affirmed by Yahowsha's comments in Mark 7:14-19 and Luke 10:8. So I consider Dabarym 12 to represent an essential instruction on how to properly observe the dietary instructions.

Yada

Here is the translation...

“These are (‘elleh – providing perspective regarding a close and godly relationship these exist as) the inscribed prescriptions on what one should do to be cut into the relationship (ha choq – the clearly communicated thoughts which are engraved in stone and shared regarding an allocation of that which is nourishing and acceptable, marking out and portraying the proper way) and the means to resolve disputes (wa ha mishpat – in addition to the means to exercise good judgment regarding making decisions in a just, judicious, and acceptable manner consistent with the evidence and authorized standard and proper plan) which relationally and beneficially (‘asher – by association and constructively) you should choose to continually and literally closely examine and carefully consider (shamar – you should of your own volition decide to always and actually focus upon, observing (qal imperfect paragogic)), to approach by engaging (la ‘asah – to act upon and benefit from) in the Land (ba ha ‘erets – in the realm) by association and constructively (‘asher – which relationally and beneficially), Yahowah (Yahowah), your God (‘elohym), has given to (natan – has produced, bestowed, offered, and appointed for) your fathers (‘aby – forefathers, family, and household) to inherit (la yarash – to possess and occupy her as an heir) all of the days (kol ha yowm – every single day) which relationally and beneficially (‘asher – by association and constructively) you (‘atem) are alive and live (chay – exist and grow) in close proximity to the Almighty’s (‘al – upon, near, and close to the Most High’s) realm of man (ha ‘adamah – earth for mankind).” (Dabarym / Words / Deuteronomy 12:1)
“You should choose of your own volition to absolutely and consistently destroy, transforming your surroundings by totally eliminating from existence (‘abad ‘abad – you should decide to do away with, cause to perish by annihilating, wiping out and then moving away from (piel (object suffers the effect of the action) imperfect (ongoing) paragogic (expression of volition))), therefore in opposition (‘eth), all of the places (kol ha maqowm – everyone of the sites and sources which provide direction for human lives) where (‘asher) the Gentiles (gowym – foreigners and nations, pagans and heathens, animalistic peoples (non-Yisra’elites)) worshipped and served, and where they were reduced to servitude as slaves in submission (‘abad – were enslaved and burdened with unfavorable circumstances, laboring for others), which (‘asher) you (‘atem) will inherit (yaras) in opposition to them and their associated gods (‘eth ‘eth ‘elohym) on the high mountains (‘al ha har ha ruwm – addressing that which is arrogantly lifted up and exalted in defiance and rebellion) and upon the hilltops (wa ‘al ha gib’ah – addressing the lord and his rulers (from gabyr – lord, master, and ruler)) in addition to (wa) under (tachath – beneath) every spreading and evil tree (kol ‘ets ra’nan – all bad and injurious flourishing wooden idols).” (Dabarym / Words / Deuteronomy 12:2)
“And you should of your own volition completely tear down and demolish (wa nathats – you should choose to pull down and destroy (piel perfect consecutive)), therefore (‘eth – associated), altars (mizbeach – places where animals are slaughtered and sacrificed to deities) and you should opt to break (wa shabar – you should choose to destroy, crushing (piel perfect consecutive)) associated (‘eth) sacred stone pillars (matsebah – stones erected to commemorate and memorialize deities) and in addition (wa) you should want to burn (saraph – you should choose to consume (qal imperfect paragogic)) ‘Asherah (‘asherah – to bless, religious idols and poles erected to worship the Canaanite pagan mother-goddess Asherah, the wife of ‘El and thus Queen of Heaven (the Canaanite variation of the Babylonian goddess Astarte (goddess of fortune and happiness and thus akin to the Roman Gratia / Graces and consort of Lord Ba’al, making her the Queen of Heaven and Mother of God in the Babylonian religion and thus the inspiration for the idols to the Queen of Heaven and the Mother of God in the Roman Catholic religion) in the flaming fire (ba ha ‘esh – within radiant light) and the idols and images (wa pacyl – man-made religious icons eliciting worship) of their gods (‘elohym) you should want to cast down and disassociate from (gada’ – you should of your own volition choose to fell, cutting down and chopping to pieces, silencing and severing relations as if they no longer exist (piel imperfect paragogic)). Then (wa) you should choose to completely wipe out (‘abad – you should want to annihilate and exterminate, blotting out, voiding so as to cause to vanish (piel perfect consecutive)) their names (‘eth shem) from (min) such places (ha maqowm ha huw’).” (Dabarym / Words / Deuteronomy 12:3)
“You should choose not to act or engage likewise (lo’ ‘asah ka – you should not want to make or do similar things) to approach (la) Yahowah (Yahowah), your God (‘elohym).” (Dabarym / Words / Deuteronomy 12:4)

“But (wa) you can genuinely choose to eat (‘akal – you should want to consume food and be completely nourished (qal perfect consecutive)) there (shem) before the presence of (la paneh) Yahowah (Yahowah), your God (‘elohym). And (wa) you should of your own volition rejoice joyfully (samah – you should be glad, having a happy attitude and outlook, choosing to delight (qal perfect consecutive)) in everything (ba kol), stretching out your open hand (mishlowach yad ‘atem – reaching out and outstretching your hand) so (wa) your families (bayth – households) beneficially are blessed (‘asher barak) by Yahowah (Yahowah), your God (‘elohym).” (Dabarym / Words / Deuteronomy 12:7)

“Indeed (ky – rather and instead, surely and truly), whenever (‘im – as a condition and as often as) in the place (ba ha maqowm – with regard to the source of direction) which beneficially (‘asher – relationally) Yahowah (Yahowah) chooses (bachar – selects and prefers (qal imperfect)) for one of your related family groups (ba ‘echad shebet – for a certain one of your tribes, branches, or offshoots), there (shem) you should meet, grow up, become acceptable, and ascend (‘alah ‘alah – you should follow, visit, withdraw, and rise, ready to be taken away (hiphil (subject causes the object to participate in the action as a secondary subject) imperfect (ongoing))). So there (wa shem), you should act upon (‘asah – you should engage in, do, and gain from) everything which beneficially (kol ‘asher) I (‘anky) have instructed (tsawah – have provided as direction and guidance).” (Dabarym / Words / Deuteronomy 12:14)
“Except (raq – however, noting this exclusive, singular, and unique instance as an exception) with (ba – in) every (kol – all) sign that points something out, denoting a desire (‘aowh – measure and depiction which denotes a preference for being called out and marked, description which sets apart based upon a fondness for a desirable and pleasing yearning) of your soul (nepesh – your unique, individual consciousness), you may actually and continually butcher (zabah – you may on an ongoing basis kill and then prepare and dress for literal consumption (qal imperfect)) and also (wa – in addition) you may choose to completely consume (‘akal – you may elect to eat as actual food and be totally nourished under the auspices of freewill (qal perfect consecutive)) creatures (basar – the flesh of living things and the meat of animals) in connection with and consistent with (ka – in harmony with and in association with) blessing and superlative gift (barakah – excellent nature of the vow which results in reconciliation and the eternal benefits of the covenant relationship by the willingness to kneel down in love) of Yahowah (YHWH), your God (‘elohym – your Almighty), which as a benefit of the relationship (‘asher – which in association and fortuitously) He has provided (nathan – He has produced and given on occasion (qal perfect)) to you (la) in any reasoned out and thoughtful conclusion in any city or town (ba kol sha’ar – in any gated area or public place where people assemble for living and by all means of thinking), the unclean (ha tame’ – the impure) and also the clean (wa ha tahowr – in addition to the pure), consistent with (ka) the beautiful (tsaby – the desirable and valuable, the glorious, or the buck) and in harmony with (wa ka) the Leader (ha ‘ayl – the Lamb, the Mighty Pillar, the Doorway, the Protective Covering, the Source of Power, Strength, and Vigorous Live, or the stag), and he may genuinely and consistently be nourished by Him (‘akal – may literally and always consume what He provides that is valuable).” (Dabarym / Words / Deuteronomy 12:15)
“Only (raq – exclusively) the blood (ha dam) you should not consume (lo’ ‘akal – you should not habitually eat or drink (qal imperfect). Upon the ground (‘al ha ‘erets) you should pour it out (shapak – you should spill it) as (ka) water (maym – liquid).” (Dabarym / Words / Deuteronomy 12:16)
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 cgb2  
#86 Posted : Sunday, February 1, 2015 3:56:37 PM(UTC)
cgb2
Joined: 5/14/2010(UTC)
Posts: 689
Location: Colorado

Thanks: 16 times
Was thanked: 23 time(s) in 17 post(s)
> It is also affirmed by Yahowsha's comments in Mark 7:14-19 and Luke 10:8.
Really? These are popular verses christians use too, but in context doesn't negate them.
Offline James  
#87 Posted : Monday, February 2, 2015 11:02:27 AM(UTC)
James
Joined: 10/23/2007(UTC)
Posts: 2,608
Man
Location: Texas

Thanks: 5 times
Was thanked: 208 time(s) in 146 post(s)
P wrote:
Yada,

I was listening to the food discussion last night regarding your “church.” I have to laugh (in disgust) at people. I can’t even imagine how many people have contributed to the books you have put out and the interpretations therein. You even added something from me when I said you were full of it and the logic dictated something else (I may not be up to snuff on translating, but I am good at logic). Hold strong, the whole family is with you.

I recently got laid off at IBM and am going to take the opportunity to get back into programming after a twenty year hiatus. One of my first programs will be a flash card program to learn the Hebrew alphabet. I plan on incorporating audio and definitions. I would like to continue it by adding words with pronunciations. Can I flagrantly plagiarize your expanded definitions in my program?

I would like to request a topic for the Friday evening Sabbath Torah Study, now that you are near the end of the 119th Psalm. I have always had a problem with the translation of the first instruction regarding the Sabbath. I would like your opinion, and a discussion, on what is meant by the restriction of doing “work” on the seventh day. We are not capable of “doing the work” of the heavenly messengers, so what is really meant?

I also have my own chocolate business, and to survive in this world, I do have to work weekends. While I always try to spend some time on the Sabbath contemplating the Torah, I almost never get a whole day away from one of my two jobs. Here is my alternate translation of the first instruction.

Six days you can engage in the labor needed to extend your existence in this world, any of the activities that allow you to be a representative of God and an example to those around you. But on the seventh day, you should not work, but should rest from your labors and entirely focus on Yahowah, His Torah, and the labors He and His messengers accomplished to bring this universe into existence for the purpose and benefit of bringing you into His family.

I fail to understand the “work of the Spiritual messenger” or us doing the “work” for which we are totally unqualified, and feel we must be missing some aspect of Yahowah’s meaning.

Another topic is how do we change when we become beings of light? Do we maintain our personalities? Do we maintain our relative intelligence level? If we gained a whole lot of knowledge and capabilities, would it really change our personalities? Many people believe that having knowledge and understanding would make them different, but an evil genius is still evil. And Satan is still Satan with all the understanding he has.

Just as an aside, a possible interpretation of being killed on the Sabbath for collecting kindling is that kindling represents your preparation for the Sabbath, for entering Yah’s family. Your preparation cannot be done at the last minute. It takes some time to gain the knowledge and understanding of Yah, and you won’t make it if you wait to the last minute. Better to kill you before you have the chance of eternal separation.

Regards,
P


Yada wrote:
P,

Disagreements are fine, even beneficial, but I think we ought to be more restrained and careful when challenging members of the Covenant. Name calling isn't a good idea. And we should be quick to forgive and forget. I'd like to see us focus entirely on the translations, as we did last night, and the most rational and consistent interpretation of them and leave it at that.

Yes, feel free to use the letter depictions. I like the flashcard approach.

I share your concern over the translation of mal'akah. I've examined the instruction every way I know how and still it's a challenge. Somewhere between ma'aseh being the Hebrew word for work and mal'ak conveying spiritual messenger is the answer we are both seeking for mal'akah - the feminine of mal'ak.

There are many who have claimed to contribute to the salvation of souls, Paul being first among them. He even said that he completed the sacrifice because Yahowsha's attempt was inadequate. So while we humans are not qualified, and while it is counterproductive and insulting to add to a gift our Father has freely and completely provided, man is forever playing savior. Moreover, there is more that the mal'ak are responsible for doing that we cannot do for ourselves and others besides the fulfillment of the Miqra'ey by the Set-Apart Spirit. Her functions are many, and many of them have been claimed by men. Consider the Pentecostals and speaking in tongues. Consider those who have claimed to have received personal revelations. Consider the fact that Catholics claim that their Pope is elected by the Holy Ghost. Evangelical Christians claim to be born again. And on and on it goes.

I concur with your concluding statement.

Yada


Yada wrote:
I forgot to add that yes, based upon nepesh and nesalmah, I'm convinced that we will go to the Father with our unique personalities and perspectives. While we will all be empowered and enriched, we may retain our relative levels of intelligence, but also relative levels of many other beneficial attributes.
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
thanks 1 user thanked James for this useful post.
FredSnell on 3/10/2015(UTC)
Offline Mike  
#88 Posted : Tuesday, February 3, 2015 7:46:56 PM(UTC)
Mike
Joined: 10/2/2007(UTC)
Posts: 531
Location: Texas

Thanks: 6 times
Was thanked: 20 time(s) in 12 post(s)
Since the discussion is about food again. Here is an e-mail exchange between Yada and me back in July 2014.

Qara 11:5 and 11:6

Quote:
M wrote

Hi Yada,

I listened to the archive of the 7-4-2014 BTR show this morning.

Lev 11:6 And the hare,H768 becauseH3588 heH1931 chewethH5927 the cud,H1625 but dividethH6536 notH3808 the hoof;H6541 heH1931 is uncleanH2931 unto you.

I think after observing (this just popped into my head) I figured out what an arnabeth is. It is a giraffe. A giraffe is a ruminant but it has an even-toed ungulate. Cattle, deer, goats, and sheep have cloven hoofs.

I came to this conclusion based on arnabeth (H768) being a compound word = H766 (cedar tree) + either H1323 (daughter) or H1004 (house). What is the only ruminant that is as tall as a cedar tree? A giraffe.


H768
ארנבת
'arnebeth
BDB Definition:
1) hare
1a) probably an extinct animal because no known hare chews its cud, exact meaning is unknown, and best left untranslated as “arnebeth”
Part of Speech: noun feminine
A Related Word by BDB/Strong’s Number: of uncertain derivation

H766
ארן
'ôren
BDB Definition:
1) fir tree, cedar
Part of Speech: noun masculine
A Related Word by BDB/Strong’s Number: from the same as H765 (in the sense of strength)

H1323
בּת
bath
BDB Definition:
1) daughter (noun feminine)
1a) daughter, girl, adopted daughter, daughter-in-law, sister, granddaughters, female child, cousin
1a1) as polite address
1a2) as designation of women of a particular place (noun proper feminine)
2) young women, women (noun feminine)
1a3) as personification
1a4) daughter-villages
1a5) description of character
Part of Speech: see above in Definition
A Related Word by BDB/Strong’s Number: from H1129 and H1121

H1004
בּית
bayith
BDB Definition:
1) house
1a) house, dwelling habitation
1b) shelter or abode of animals
1c) human bodies (figuratively)
1d) of Sheol
1e) of abode of light and darkness
1f) of land of Ephraim
2) place
3) receptacle
4) home, house as containing a family
5) household, family
5a) those belonging to the same household
5b) family of descendants, descendants as organized body
6) household affairs
7) inwards (metaphorically)
8) (TWOT) temple
9) on the inside
10) within
Part of Speech: noun masculine
A Related Word by BDB/Strong’s Number: probably from H1129 abbreviated

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ruminant

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Even-toed_ungulate

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cloven_hoof


Lev 11:5 And the coney,H8227 becauseH3588 heH1931 chewethH5927 the cud,H1625 but dividethH6536 notH3808 the hoof;H6541 heH1931 is uncleanH2931 unto you.

My guess for the shaphan (H8227) is a hippopotamus since it is a pseudoruminant and doesn’t have a cloven hoof. H8227 is based on H8226 saphan, which means to cover or hide. I have always seen pictures of hippos mostly under the water with just the top of their head sticking out of the water, mostly hidden from view.

H8227
שׁפן
shâphân
BDB Definition:
1) rock badger, coney, the hyrax (noun masculine)
2) secretary or scribe of king Josiah of Judah (noun proper masculine)
3) father of Ahikam in the time of king Josiah of Judah (noun proper masculine)
3a) improbably the same as 2
4) father of Elasah in the time of the prophet Jeremiah (noun proper masculine)
4a) perhaps the same as 3
5) a scribe and father of Gemariah (noun proper masculine)
5a) perhaps the same as 2
6) father of Jaazaniah in the time of Ezekiel (noun proper masculine)
6a) perhaps the same as 2
Part of Speech: see above in Definition
A Related Word by BDB/Strong’s Number: from H8226

H8226
שׂפן
śâphan
BDB Definition:
1) to cover, cover in, panel, hide, treasure up
1a) (Qal)
1a1) covered, panelled, treasures (participle)
Part of Speech: verb
A Related Word by BDB/Strong’s Number: a primitive root
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pseudoruminant
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hippopotamus

BTW, I have hunted and eaten wild rabbits, do you think that is OK or not?

I really enjoy the BTR shows.

Shalom,



Quote:
Y wrote
That's interesting. I don't know if there were any of these so far north.
I suspect that you could eat hare until pigs fly and it wouldn't make a hair of difference.


Quote:
M wrote
According to this article the giraffe disappeared from Egypt 4000 years ago. But in below articles they were still imported by the pharaohs even to the time of Julius Caesar so the giraffe would have been known to Moshe because he was adopted by pharaoh’s daughter. Hippos still exist in the Nile River in Egypt today.

Distribution
Historic:
10,000 years ago, present throughout Africa
As northern Africa became drier, eventually turning into desert, giraffes disappeared from northern and Saharan Africa.
4,000 years ago disappeared from Egypt; 1,400 years ago disappeared from Morocco.
Present: Patchy, non-continuous distribution in portions of Sub-Saharan Africa. Not present in most of western, central, and far southern Africa.
http://library.sandiegoz...eets/giraffe/giraffe.htm

http://www.reshafim.org....imelines/topics/zoos.htm

Giraffes and many other kinds of exotic animals were brought to Egypt through Nubia. They were kept by the pharaoh to show that he had conquered foreign lands. Gazelles, giraffes, leopards and other animals were often brought to Egypt through tribute or trade . Sometimes these animals were kept in the pharaoh's private gardens for his family to enjoy. Other times, these animals were traded to other countries, or sent to foreign rulers as gifts.

http://www.ancientegypt....oh/explore/anima_f3.html

In the Book of the Dead there are occasionally daemons called Giraffe:
The god who guards you, his name is Giraffe (mmj). His name came into existence when no cedar tree had grown yet, no acacia had come into being and no metal had been created in his mountain land.

http://www.reshafim.org....ypt/bestiary/giraffe.htm

With their forceful kicks and enormous height, one might assume a giraffe would make a poor pet. Ancient Egyptians thought otherwise.
As early as 2,500 B.C., Egyptian rulers captured giraffes and paraded them in front of their subjects. Hunters found giraffes fairly easy to transport on a raft down the Nile, so they could provide a steady supply of these exotic animals. Giraffes were so impressive and regal that the Egyptians started giving them as presents—and passive-aggressive examples of their power—to the rulers of other countries.
The most famous recipient of a giraffe gift was none other than Julius Caesar, who was most impressed by the present. He named his new prize animal “cameleopard,” because he thought it resembled a cross between the two species. He paraded it home for the whole of Rome to admire. And then he stuck the poor animal in a circus arena and fed it to lions to show his power.
Moral of the story—you don’t become the emperor of the most powerful nation in the world by being a particularly nice person.
http://listverse.com/201...ng-facts-about-giraffes/

Shalom,

Quote:
Y wrote
If they disappeared from Egypt 4000 years ago, they would not have made the Torah's list for Yisra'el as something to avoid eating. And the giraffes were a status symbol, not a food source. So while I like your reasoning and research, I suspect that the purpose was to communicate a message to teach us something rather than to influence our diet. You may still be right regarding giraffe, but not because it was to be disregarded as food.
JC was a mean sob. So was Rome.

Quote:
M wrote
I get the concept that Yah is not just talking about eating food here or maybe not talking about food at all.

Perhaps the giraffe (arnebeth) represents political power here and Yah is telling us to separate ourselves from political power.

Perhaps the hippopotamus (shaphan) represents fertility cults and Yah is telling us to separate ourselves from fertility cults. Fertility cults have been popular throughout history and still exist as the Ishtar bunny.

In Egyptian mythology, Taweret (also spelled Taurt, Tuat, Taouris, Tuart, Ta-weret, Tawaret, Twert, and Taueret, and in Greek, Θουέρις "Thouéris" and Toeris) is the protective ancient Egyptian goddess of childbirth and fertility. The name "Taweret" (Tȝ-wrt) means, "she who is great" or simply, "great one," a common pacificatory address to dangerous deities.[1] The deity is typically depicted as a bipedal female hippopotamus with feline attributes, pendulous female human breasts, and the back of a Nile crocodile. She commonly bears the epithets "Lady of Heaven," "Mistress of the Horizon," "She Who Removes Water," "Mistress of Pure Water," and "Lady of the Birth House."[2]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Taweret


Please send me the paper that you wrote about Rome.

Shalom,

Quote:
Y wrote
Great stuff, Mike. Keep it coming! This is my favorite form of feedback and exchange of ideas.
thanks 1 user thanked Mike for this useful post.
Sheree on 2/22/2015(UTC)
Offline Mike  
#89 Posted : Tuesday, February 3, 2015 8:26:30 PM(UTC)
Mike
Joined: 10/2/2007(UTC)
Posts: 531
Location: Texas

Thanks: 6 times
Was thanked: 20 time(s) in 12 post(s)
Fins and Scales - Qara 11:9 through12

Since the discussion has been about food lately, again. Here is an e-mail exchange between Yada and me from July 2014.

Quote:
M wrote:

Hi Yada,

I have been thinking about Qara 11:9 through12. Why are both fins and scales listed? There are no fish that have scales but no fins but snakes have scales but no fins and can live in rivers. And there are fish that have fins but no scales such as catfish. And of course things like clams, shrimp, mussels, etc. that have neither fins or scales.

I am getting nowhere looking into the etymology of H5579 (fins), I can’t find the root word (Nun-Pey-Resh) in BDB or Strong’s. So I started thinking about the function of fins. Fins guide and propel the fish forward. Forward direction is relative but a fish can only move forward. There is no reverse gear on a fish just like motorcycles and airplanes.

Looking at the etymology of H7193 (scale), BDB and Strong’s is useless but now I am pretty convinced that it means Truth or Truth-squared. I think the root word is H7187 or H7189. I don’t think that it is a coincidence that the English word scale can mean either the scales of a fish or a scale the device used to measure the true weight of an object.

I just had a revelation about snakes. They have scales (truth) but no fins (guidance moving forward). Satan is represented by a snake. Satan had the Torah to start with but decided to reject it. Also the Israelites had the Torah to start with but many of them decided to reject or ignore it.

It was good to have fins (guidance moving forward) and scales (truth = Torah), so if you were moving forward and had guidance and found the truth (= Torah) and accepted it that was good. Or if you had the scales (truth = Torah) to start with and then used the fins (guidance moving forward) the Torah would guide your life and that is good.

If people had fins (guidance moving forward) and were seeking the truth (scales) but never found it that is bad.

The majority of people don’t have fins or scales. They never had the truth and they are not interested in seeking out the truth.

Have you looked at the etymology of fins and scales yet? Or translated these verses? Let me know what you think about this.

Below are the BDB definitions of the words that I researched.
H5579
סנפּיר
senappı̂yr
BDB Definition:
1) fin
Part of Speech: noun masculine
A Related Word by BDB/Strong’s Number: of uncertain derivation


So what are the function of fins? To propel and guide the movement of the fish.

H7193
קשׂקשׂת
qaśqeśeth
BDB Definition:
1) scale (of fish, water animals)
Part of Speech: noun feminine
A Related Word by BDB/Strong’s Number: by reduplication from an unused root meaning to shale off as bark


H7187
קשׁט / קשׁוט (Aramaic)
qeshôṭ̣
BDB Definition:
1) truth
Part of Speech: noun masculine
A Related Word by BDB/Strong’s Number: corresponding to H7189

H7189
קשׁט / קשׁט
qosheṭ / qoshṭ
BDB Definition:
1) bow
2) truth, balanced verity
Part of Speech: noun masculine
A Related Word by BDB/Strong’s Number: from an unused root meaning to balance

H7185
קשׁה
qâshâh
BDB Definition:
1) to be hard, be severe, be fierce, be harsh
1a) (Qal)
1a1) to be hard, be difficult
1a2) to be hard, be severe
1b) (Niphal)
1b1) to be ill-treated
1b2) to be hard pressed
1c) (Piel) to have severe labour (of women)
1d) (Hiphil)
1d1) to make difficult, make difficulty
1d2) to make severe, make burdensome
1d3) to make hard, make stiff, make stubborn
1d3a) of obstinacy (figuratively)
1d4) to show stubbornness
Part of Speech: verb
A Related Word by BDB/Strong’s Number: a primitive root

H7186
קשׁה
qâsheh
BDB Definition:
1) hard, cruel, severe, obstinate
1a) hard, difficult
1b) severe
1c) fierce, intense, vehement
1d) stubborn, stiff of neck, stiff-necked
1e) rigorous (of battle)
Part of Speech: adjective
A Related Word by BDB/Strong’s Number: from H7185

H7181
קשׁב
qâshab
BDB Definition:
1) to hear, be attentive, heed, incline (of ears), attend (of ears), hearken, pay attention, listen
1a) (Qal) incline, attend (of ears), hearken, pay attention, listen
1b) (Hiphil) to pay attention, give attention
Part of Speech: verb
A Related Word by BDB/Strong’s Number: a primitive root

H7199
קשּׁת
qashshâth
BDB Definition:
1) bowman, archer
Part of Speech: noun masculine
A Related Word by BDB/Strong’s Number: intensive (as denominative) from H7198
H7198
קשׁת
qesheth
BDB Definition:
1) bow
1a) bow (for hunting, battle)
1b) bowmen, archers
1c) bow (figuratively of might)
1d) rainbow
Part of Speech: noun feminine
A Related Word by BDB/Strong’s Number: from H7185 in the original sense of H6983 of bending

H6983
קושׁ
qôsh
BDB Definition:
1) (Qal) to lay bait or lure, lay a snare, lure
Part of Speech: verb
A Related Word by BDB/Strong’s Number: a primitive root

Lev 11:9 (H853) TheseH2088 shall ye eatH398 of allH4480 H3605 thatH834 are in the waters:H4325 whatsoeverH3605 H834 hath finsH5579 and scalesH7193 in the waters,H4325 in the seas,H3220 and in the rivers,H5158 them shall ye eat.H398
Lev 11:10 And allH3605 thatH834 have notH369 finsH5579 and scalesH7193 in the seas,H3220 and in the rivers,H5158 of allH4480 H3605 that moveH8318 in the waters,H4325 and of anyH4480 H3605 livingH2416 thingH5315 whichH834 is in the waters,H4325 theyH1992 shall be an abominationH8263 unto you:
Lev 11:11 They shall beH1961 even an abominationH8263 unto you; ye shall notH3808 eatH398 of their flesh,H4480 H1320 but ye shall have their carcases in abomination.H8262 (H853) H5038
Lev 11:12 WhatsoeverH3605 H834 hath noH369 finsH5579 nor scalesH7193 in the waters,H4325 thatH1931 shall be an abominationH8263 unto you.

Shalom,


Quote:
Y wrote:

M,
This is exactly why Yah shared these words in this way. And I wouldn't be surprised if He did it for the sole purpose of knowing that you'd figure this out and share it with us. It is brilliant. It is exciting. It is useful guidance. It's the joy of discovery.
Great stuff, Mike. And honestly, I'm more excited over it because you figured it out not me. I feel like I may have started you off in the right direction with the right perspective but then you went way beyond the point where I had left off. This is the way Yah envisions us living as part of His Covenant family.
My hope has always been that one day many of those that I've pointed in the right direction by sharing Yah's Word would greatly surpass me in understanding it. This is a giant leap in that regard. It is a very happy day for me and for our Father.
thanks 3 users thanked Mike for this useful post.
matt on 2/4/2015(UTC), Anne on 2/7/2015(UTC), Sheree on 2/12/2015(UTC)
Offline James  
#90 Posted : Friday, February 20, 2015 7:10:07 PM(UTC)
James
Joined: 10/23/2007(UTC)
Posts: 2,608
Man
Location: Texas

Thanks: 5 times
Was thanked: 208 time(s) in 146 post(s)
D wrote:
Yada,

Reading through Leviticus and came upon 23:15-16, I noticed the verse seems to suggest counting 7 Shabats from First Fruits and then adding 50 days. However it is commonly understood Weeks is to be celebrated on the 50th day, I was thinking this was a wheat harvest festival originally, so how long does it take to plant and then harvest this grain.

I decided to ask my wife, she grew up on a farm (she is PA Dutch) apparently 3 to 4 months for wheat. This got me thinking: Could this verse actually mean to add 50 more days after counting 7 Shabats?

D


Yada wrote:
It's 7 x 7 from Bikuwrym or 50 from Matsah. And it's barley, not wheat. Yisra'el is south of PA and more coastal, so probably warmer earlier, too.
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
thanks 1 user thanked James for this useful post.
shamar emet on 2/21/2015(UTC)
Offline James  
#91 Posted : Sunday, February 22, 2015 7:02:33 PM(UTC)
James
Joined: 10/23/2007(UTC)
Posts: 2,608
Man
Location: Texas

Thanks: 5 times
Was thanked: 208 time(s) in 146 post(s)
W wrote:
Yada,

How would you interpret this passage Shemoth 34:15?


Shabat Shalowm Brother,

W


yada wrote:
Yah does not want us to do anything associated with religion. Offerings made to false gods as part of a religious ceremony are thus inappropriate.
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  
#92 Posted : Saturday, February 28, 2015 12:33:44 PM(UTC)
James
Joined: 10/23/2007(UTC)
Posts: 2,608
Man
Location: Texas

Thanks: 5 times
Was thanked: 208 time(s) in 146 post(s)
D wrote:
Hello Yada ~

I've been translating Yah's Towrah directly from the pictographs in Jeff Benner's "Ancient Hebrew Towrah" and using lexicons occasionally, but only if the pictographs don't make the meaning clear and only if the lexicon meaning can be supported in the pictograph letter sequences. I've found Barashyt to progress fairly consistently with common translations but with much more detail (as has been your experience). However, I've found a substantial divergence starting with Barashyt 1:26 and continuing to 3:7 (which is as far as I've gotten so far). Here's are a few examples:

• 2:4 and to the outer wall and to all who are seen from here to there, give to all this point: I came to exist in the land and went to draw to the light, becoming visible to many individuals at a location known by a sign, to the many inside the wall; that it was yahowah 'alowhym, the most high they mocked at the place watched over by many; the land and the man were red as wine from the beam to the ground
• 2:21 and clear a path, yahowah 'alowhym; mark the individual in your likeness; protecting, nurturing and guiding the radiant light at the door and continue to do as was done before; and wait at the wall separated from the location; come from the far away place of shadows toward the mark to the position; and from the shut-up place with good news, with meat for a feast; return from the low and separated place restored as an heir
• 2:24 observe, be nurtured and taught by this continuously for this is given as the food of the house: see, reach out to, and listen to the enlightened and uplifted individual at the location the father of the house has given and also your mother who surrounds you in light; and enter the home together enclosed in the light of the uplifted and eternal place; and they are to be the good news and cause for celebration and feasting, set-apart as one and complete

I hope you'll take a moment to view the rest at: http://hebrew.xobjex.com/towrah/#1.26

If not, would you please forward this to Kirk? I know he also favors the pictographs and I would love to collaborate with him.

Thank You!

D


Yada wrote:
This is a fascinating way to discern the meaning of the message, approaching the words through their letters and then building upon the image of the pictures to flesh out sentences and thoughts. I read this and compared it to the more common translations and found yours to be more insightful. But I suspect that lexicons and letter pictures can be used in harmony rather than rely on just one or the other.
I've sent this to Kirk. I appreciate you doing this and sharing it.
I think Brenner means well and that his approach is logical, thoughtful, and well researched. But I'm not convinced that he knows Yah or that he understands the Covenant. I may be wrong, but I suspect that his detached view may cloud some of his definitions and depictions. I haven't been to his site in many years and this may have changed, but if not, I'd augment his suggestions with other material to garner a more complete picture.
Yada


D wrote:
I agree with your assessment of Benner completely -- I don't think he has a clue and I am all but certain that he has NOT translated the "Ancient Hebrew Towrah" he's published. I don't know where he got it, but it's been very, very rewarding to translate! It has become my full-time occupation.

Thank you for forwarding it to Kirk. I hope he shows interest and we have a chance to discuss it. I think you'll both eventually agree that this approach has merit.


Yada wrote:
Tonight on Yada Yah Radio during our Shabat broadcast which begins in less than 15 minutes on Blog Talk Radio we are going to use both methods to translate Numbers 6.22-27. Join us.
I think our mutual assessment of B is pretty obvious, and yet he has provided some very useful tools and insights.

Yada

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  
#93 Posted : Monday, April 6, 2015 11:38:17 AM(UTC)
James
Joined: 10/23/2007(UTC)
Posts: 2,608
Man
Location: Texas

Thanks: 5 times
Was thanked: 208 time(s) in 146 post(s)
JM wrote:
Yada,

After our family reading of Yada Yah about First Fruits, a question arose about who is annihilated vs. who is in hell? Obviously false teachers are in hell with Paul, etc. but what about most Christian homeschool families we know? We assume that they are annihilated but what about the small group teachers? Are they in hell since they taught incorrectly? They don’t know they are teaching incorrectly so we thought they would probably be annihilated.

Also, the parable below, why was this rich man in hell instead on annihilated? Thanks. –Jerry

Parable of Rich Man and Lazarus:

Luke 16:19-31King James Version (KJV)
19 There was a certain rich man, which was clothed in purple and fine linen, and fared sumptuously every day:

20 And there was a certain beggar named Lazarus, which was laid at his gate, full of sores,

21 And desiring to be fed with the crumbs which fell from the rich man's table: moreover the dogs came and licked his sores.

22 And it came to pass, that the beggar died, and was carried by the angels into Abraham's bosom: the rich man also died, and was buried;

23 And in hell he lift up his eyes, being in torments, and seeth Abraham afar off, and Lazarus in his bosom.

24 And he cried and said, Father Abraham, have mercy on me, and send Lazarus, that he may dip the tip of his finger in water, and cool my tongue; for I am tormented in this flame.

25 But Abraham said, Son, remember that thou in thy lifetime receivedst thy good things, and likewise Lazarus evil things: but now he is comforted, and thou art tormented.

26 And beside all this, between us and you there is a great gulf fixed: so that they which would pass from hence to you cannot; neither can they pass to us, that would come from thence.

27 Then he said, I pray thee therefore, father, that thou wouldest send him to my father's house:

28 For I have five brethren; that he may testify unto them, lest they also come into this place of torment.

29 Abraham saith unto him, They have Moses and the prophets; let them hear them.

30 And he said, Nay, father Abraham: but if one went unto them from the dead, they will repent.

31 And he said unto him, If they hear not Moses and the prophets, neither will they be persuaded, though one rose from the dead.


Yada wrote:
JM,

Your conclusion is correct. As for the rich man and the beggar, there is much more to the story than is being told. The poor man isn't in heaven because he is poor, but because he engaged in the Covenant. But based on what we are told, we can conclude that the rich man was belligerently rich, meaning that he promoted the kind of economic system that made him superior to others. It's not just the promotion of religion that gets a soul into trouble. So does the promotion of economic schemes, the military, patriotism, and politics to name a few.

Religion is the worst thing a person can promote, but it isn't the only thing that leads souls away from Yah.

Yada
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  
#94 Posted : Friday, May 1, 2015 2:08:43 PM(UTC)
James
Joined: 10/23/2007(UTC)
Posts: 2,608
Man
Location: Texas

Thanks: 5 times
Was thanked: 208 time(s) in 146 post(s)
J wrote:
They do not honor Shabbat, as we know.

He asked me a question, which I did not have the answer.

He asked, Does it not state in the Torah, that a person that does not honor the Shabbat is suppose to be put to death?

Therefore why do I not start killing those that do NOT honor the Shabbat.

Can you assist me with the response?

He is coming back for the answer and I have invited him for coffee.


​Attentively,

​​J


Yada wrote:
Yes it does. If a Yisra'elite during the time the Torah was being revealed opposed Yah's instructions in Yisra'el in Yahowah's presence they were killed to demonstrate that opposition to Yah's plan leads to the death of one's soul. Yahowah saved them from slavery and He gave them the opportunity for eternal life, so to truncate a mortal existence, something He also provided, to underscore the reality that our lives will end if we expect Yah will alter His plan was a loving thing to do. If we don't make an example of the bad for the sake of the good, there will be no good.

Since you aren't a Yisra'elite living at the time of Moseh being led through the wilderness in Yahowah's presence, you'd be guilty of murder, so don't do it. Yisra'elites during this time serve as examples of good and bad, not you or your neighbor. Today the instruction is enlightening and not a command.

Yada
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
thanks 2 users thanked James for this useful post.
Fred Snell on 5/1/2015(UTC), Sheree on 5/10/2015(UTC)
Offline James  
#95 Posted : Saturday, May 30, 2015 3:29:29 PM(UTC)
James
Joined: 10/23/2007(UTC)
Posts: 2,608
Man
Location: Texas

Thanks: 5 times
Was thanked: 208 time(s) in 146 post(s)
FS wrote:
Dear Yada, could you explain what is the Spiritual Service that we should not do during Shabat day and His Mow'ed Miqra'ey.....I'm a bit confuse,because you suggest that we are to read and recite the Towrah ,isn't it part of the Malak'ah (means declaring Heavenly message)


Yada wrote:
FS,

At current that is my most challenging explanation. I'm not sure, so I'm left to speculate. But I'm sure Paul was in violation of it when he claimed to have finished the inadequate sacrifice of Yahowsha'. I'm pretty sure Roman Catholic priests are in violation of it when they forgive after confession and claim to turn wine into blood for the Eucharist.

I see it as a realization that Yahowah did everything perfectly and completely on the Shabat of Matsah and that there is nothing more to be done on our account or on account of others. We should come to His Mow'ed and not attempt to pay the bill for the party.

Yada
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
thanks 1 user thanked James for this useful post.
Sheree on 6/2/2015(UTC)
Offline James  
#96 Posted : Friday, June 12, 2015 8:42:23 PM(UTC)
James
Joined: 10/23/2007(UTC)
Posts: 2,608
Man
Location: Texas

Thanks: 5 times
Was thanked: 208 time(s) in 146 post(s)
D wrote:
Funny, Yada......

How you were just speaking today with Kirk about Richard's site. (excellent site)...makes things very easy...having
so much info (and links to info) in one place.

Was texting back and forth with an old
friend this evening. He had expressed
some exacerbation/indignation about
all of the corruption we see around us...




I believe he is an agnostic. (a very smart guy; logically minded; rational; an engineer by degree and trade)

I don't know
if he'll be receptive. I may have risked
losing another friend. Then again, I may
have had a tiny part in expanding Yah's
family.

If there could be anything more rewarding, I've not been told.

Enjoying the shows, still, very much.

I hope you do not become a "Reds" (Cincinnati) fan.

D


Yada wrote:
Thank you, D. It's usually beneficial to point an agnostic to YY and ITG so long as you don't push them. What you have done is what I've done many times, often with considerable success. Lead them to the truth and then let them decide what to do with what they find. Be prepared to answer their questions, but don't badger them. This is all good, especially at Richard's site where there is a full menu of options.

I've been a Dodger fan but apart from a couple of players, I don't know them anymore. I've become an Angel's fan. And I hope to become a Reds fan once we get settled in the Queen City.

Yada
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  
#97 Posted : Monday, June 15, 2015 7:12:14 AM(UTC)
James
Joined: 10/23/2007(UTC)
Posts: 2,608
Man
Location: Texas

Thanks: 5 times
Was thanked: 208 time(s) in 146 post(s)
M wrote:
Hello-

Hoping that you have a second to answer a quick question. Growing up as a Christian, I have obviously taken on false beliefs. In the midst of all of this, I regret that I have tattooed my body with a crucifix. As one who has a better relationship with Yah (though my eyes have been opened), how do I approach Him and rectify this mistake?

Thank you,
M


Yada wrote:
M,

Once you became a member of the Covenant your body became irrelevant. And as a son of Yah, your mistakes are unseen and unknown by Him. So you don't need to approach Yah on this and He has already rectified your mistake.

However, you know that it is there and that it is wrong, even offensive. Others may see it too and it may reinforce errant beliefs. So if I were you I'd pay a professional to get it removed. Removing it will be beneficial for you and for those who see you.

I don't claim to be an "Answer Man." I've been wrong more than my share of times. And the best advice is always to read what the Towrah has to say about tattoos and religious images (not good). But since you asked, and so long as you know my limitations, that is my advice.

Yasa
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  
#98 Posted : Tuesday, June 16, 2015 4:11:19 PM(UTC)
James
Joined: 10/23/2007(UTC)
Posts: 2,608
Man
Location: Texas

Thanks: 5 times
Was thanked: 208 time(s) in 146 post(s)
DG wrote:
I had a question about circumcision, and the role a female would play who never got to be a mother and never will be. There are a lot of us out there for one reason or another, so I'm feeling a bit left out of that equation. Wondered what your thoughts are on that. I will certainly spread the news about how important this is, so maybe that is how I can figure into it in a more broader scale than a personal family?


Yada wrote:
DG,

I suspect that everything you presented is not only possible but likely. And it's the result of "shamaring" that you came to these enlightened conclusions. Men and women play different, yet equally important and revealing, roles in the human family that help model the Covenant Family.

It strikes me as telling that Yah's "conditions" for participating in His Covenant Family are so beneficial that rather than considering them a burden or sacrifice, you and others are looking for ways to accept and apply them. In this regard, you are circumcised, in that you have literally cut yourself into the Covenant by having "shamared" its terms and conditions and by having accepted them. Moreover, you have acknowledged that if you were to have a son you would do as Yahowah has asked. That is a demonstration of knowing, understanding, and acceptance which is the entire purpose of the condition in the first place.

My wife and I did this for our sons, but at the time we did not understand the Covenant, so for us it was not an actual acceptance of its final condition. I am, therefore, in your situation, having to accept this condition based upon understanding rather than doing. Further, my parents had me circumcised at birth, even though doing so wasn't related to the Covenant. Therefore, personally and with my sons, my situation is very similar to your own. And that takes us right back to "shamaring." That is what has made the difference for you and for me in the sight of Yah with regard to the sign and final condition of the Covenant.

Yada
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
thanks 1 user thanked James for this useful post.
Sheree on 6/18/2015(UTC)
Offline James  
#99 Posted : Monday, July 20, 2015 3:55:10 PM(UTC)
James
Joined: 10/23/2007(UTC)
Posts: 2,608
Man
Location: Texas

Thanks: 5 times
Was thanked: 208 time(s) in 146 post(s)
J wrote:
As there's only one covenant, I'm confused as to why Jesus stated the breaking of his body was the new testament.


Yada wrote:
J,

There was no "Jesus." Yahowsha' didn't say that. He would never contradict Yahowah and Yahowah has only one Covenant. When it is finally renewed upon His return, the renewal will be with Yisra'el and Yahuwdah, not a Gentile church. And the only difference between the existing Covenant and its reaffirmation is that Yahowah will be writing His Torah inside of His Covenant children - and thus incorporating the Torah Teaching into the very fabric of our lives.

Have you ever considered Mattanyah / Matthew 5-7? What does Yahowsha' say about the Torah?

Two of the three accounts of what Yahowsha' said in Hebrew while celebrating the Passover meal, translated to Greek, have Him only saying "beryth - covenant," not "new," "renewed," or "testament." A covenant is a family relationship, not a "testament." The third account is hearsay, in conflict with the other two, and thus altered to fit the Pauline religion. There are 300,000 known variants between the Textus Receptus and the oldest 1st, 2nd, 3rd, and early 4th century manuscripts so copy edits are common.

Read what Yahowah has to say about the ultimate renewal of His one and only Covenant with Yisra'el and Yahuwdah upon his return. You'll find it covered in www.YadaYah.com as we review Yirama'yah 31.

Yada


J wrote:
Yada;

I very much appreciate these emails as I'm walking away from my Christian roots. I've been brow beaten by my family and pastor friend for simply pointing out the differing messages between Yahowsha and Paul.

It was some years ago I started to see the cracks in Christianity. In this regard, almost every believer I know has refused to be there for me.

Thank-you greatly;
J


Yada wrote:
J,

You are named after Yahowsha' and are doing what He encouraged us to do. You will find www.QuestioningPaul.com helpful. It will befuddle your former pastor and enlighten you. There you will find answers to questions like the one you posed, but in Yahowah's words, not my summation of them. By the time you are done, not only will you have wholly separated yourself from your Christian past, as so many of us have now done, but better, you will be headed towards the Covenant.

Yada

Edited by user Tuesday, July 21, 2015 7:21:23 AM(UTC)  | Reason: Not specified

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  
#100 Posted : Thursday, September 24, 2015 7:33:28 AM(UTC)
James
Joined: 10/23/2007(UTC)
Posts: 2,608
Man
Location: Texas

Thanks: 5 times
Was thanked: 208 time(s) in 146 post(s)
P wrote:
Re-reading Taruwah, this is where I had previously read and didnt quite understand it.

While this review serves to affirm that the Taruw’ah harvest predicts the ingathering of souls who are filled with the Spirit, Yahowah had more to say regarding the nature of the Miqra’ey in general, and Trumpets in particular, in the next verse. “You should not offer (‘lo zabah – or sacrifice) yeast (chamets – leavened foods or vinegar, that which is sour or bitter, that which causes grieving and sorrow) near (‘al – with or to) My (‘any) blood (dam) sacrifice (zebah – sacrificial offering). And do not (lo’) allow fat to remain through the night (yalyn heleb – lipid tissue to endure the night) of My (‘any) Festival Feast (‘ani chag – I Am’s Celebratory Parties), continuing to exist until (‘ad – enduring until) morning (boqer – first light).” (Shemowth / Names / Exodus 23:18) Taruw’ah is about celebrating the harvest of saved souls, and correlating it each year with the time the Redeemer will come to gather and
collect His children.
The terminology in this passage is intriguing. In Qara’ / Called Out / Leviticus, there was no mention of a sacrificial offering associated with the Called-Out Assembly of Trumpets. But now we are told that an offering isn’t to include yeast, the symbol of corruption and sin, or vinegar, the product of spoiled wine. That is because only those souls who have had these things removed by the atoning blood of Yahowah’s sacrificial lamb will participate in this harvest.


I can see that the instruction to participate in Taruwah without yeast in referring to us. Since the unleavened blemish has been removed from us who participated in Pesach, Matsah, Bikuwrym.

Am I correct??

Thanks.


Yada wrote:
Yes. Your conclusion is identical with my own. This is appropriate and thoughtful analysis. You have made all of the proper connections. Well done.

Yada
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
Users browsing this topic
4 Pages<1234>
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.