Yada Yahweh Email help@yadayahweh.com
if you encounter any problems.
Join us at PalTalk:
Study Group Education/Study Groups/YY Study Group
Free Trial of Paltalk
Welcome GuestHome | Search | Active Topics | Log In | Register

Japhet,Ham & Shem Options · View
JamesH
#1 Posted : Sunday, August 05, 2012 3:03:00 PM

Joined: 1/8/2008
Posts: 356
Location: Fresno, CA
JamesH
#2 Posted : Sunday, August 05, 2012 6:20:08 PM

Joined: 1/8/2008
Posts: 356
Location: Fresno, CA
What I have found interesting about this Map is, according to my family history we were originally from the farming and fishing area of Germany (Askenaz) (year?)

Then migrated to the farming and fishing area of southern Russia. (Year?)

Then migrated to Northern Saskatchewan, Canada and the San Joaquin valley, California in the late 1800’s to today, farming.

I also find it interesting the blessings and cursings Genesis (9:18-27)that Noah gave his sons Japhet, Ham and Shem, and see how it applies to the world today. (i.e. Gog and Maygog)

Jim
encounterHim
#3 Posted : Monday, August 06, 2012 8:15:49 AM

Joined: 1/29/2011
Posts: 868
Location: Houston, Texas
Jim, according to scripture, these 3 men would re-populate the whole earth? I'm not so sure of this any longer. Of course, Shem, Ham and Japhet were the only surviving sons of Noah. And Ham received the curse for what he had, "DONE" to his father? What bothers me in the biblical account is, if God saw the future of all this, and knowing mans use of his own freewill, what is the purpose? Is it all so God can grow by the love of those trying to find these answers so they can understand Yahs will? So many today are under the assumption, the entire world flooded and the more I read about it, the more doubts I get.

By best conservative count, the Ark would have had to handle, not only all the fresh water and food for a little over a year for all these animals, but for family also. In one study I came acroos before, they reported that there would have had enough room to accomodate,
1) 17,400 birds
2) 12,000 reptiles
3) 9,000 mammals
4) 5,000 amphibians
5) 2,000,000 insects

It's known that just 2 elephants require, 365,000 pounds of food a yr. along with 36,500 gallons of water. It only rained for 40 days so we must consider,, what of the other 325 days left afloat? And this would just be the elephants, not considering all the rest of the animals to tend to.
So by size of mammal this food would decrease in size per animal, but there are still large animals in the world besides the elepahnts.
A girraffe eats 54K pounds of food a yr. A hippo eats 66k and so on. And I haven't even got to all the meat eaters. Two lions would eat over 16k pounds of meat a year and how about all the spoiled meat? I've had christians tell me that most were baby animals when they were sent to Noah? So animals around the world marched towards Noah..a long walk I would assume. So did these babies grow any during this walk?
Now the rains according to scripture covered every mountain by at least 20ft. To me at least looking at the elevation of the tallest mountain (Everest) that would mean the earth was covered to a depth of at least, 29,000 ft of sea level. Doesn't the atmosphere at this height, freeze? What kept all in the Ark from freezing to death? Even today, just mild changes in our atmoshere impact the oceans to degrees (a visa versa) we are just now starting to understand today. I know from watching tv that at that atmoshere most of the animals aboard would have needed oxygen mask.
So, what I guess I'm getting at is, if we can square the biblical account to actual scripture, fine. But I suspect much that has been put to paper just wouldn't fit into mans realization today. Even the 3 sons re=populating the entire world. I might be wrong, but to me, a lot just doesn't add up. And that was for only two of each animal, when it clearly states there were actually 16 of each, clean and un-clean.
encounterHim
#4 Posted : Monday, August 06, 2012 8:55:02 AM

Joined: 1/29/2011
Posts: 868
Location: Houston, Texas
I should have said that I am leaning more towards what Yada reports as being more a local event instead of a world wide flood. Looking at it even farther than just land, we must still consider all the animal life in rivers, lakes and oceans, too. The water temp would change to a degree I believe, I'm sure that couldn't sustain the life in it. The salt mixing with the fresh with light filtration and pressure changes do to this new amount of water surely would have meant for a fish kill of all of them. And even when all these animals would have exited the Ark, all plant life would have been dead, so what would the herbivores eaten? Carnivores surely would of had plenty of dead meat if the story is written right, but I now have my doubts. But what would have stopped the meat eaters from going after the fresh (live) meat and causing extinction to that line?
If you did a comparison of the Titanic, vs. Noahs Ark
1) height-Titanic..175ft. vs Noahs Ark=45ft.
2) length-...........882ft. vs 450ft.
3) width-............. 92ft. vs. 75ft.
4) construction-...steel vs. wood
Capacity of the Titanic: 3,547 people and enough provisions for a couple of weeks.
James
#5 Posted : Monday, August 06, 2012 8:55:24 AM


Joined: 10/23/2007
Posts: 2,159
Location: Texas
Scripture never actually says the the whole world was flooded. In fact, to my best recollection it never uses kol, the word for all, in relation to 'eretz during the entire account. It does tell us that the 'eretz was flooded, and as we all know 'eretz rarely means earth, and most frequently means land or region.

Combine that with the scientific fact that there is not, nor ever has been enough water in, on and above the Earth to cover the top of Mount Everest. We are left with two choices either God lied and said the Earth flooded, or that man mistranslated the text and God said that the region flooded.

In addition there was no need to flood outside of the that region. The only purpose for the flood was to remove all neshamah equipped humans (those made in God's image) save Noach and his family. Humans made in God's image, those having a neshamah, had not left that region.

Now if you examine a topographical map of that region you will see that it forms a pretty large bowl which could easily have been filled flooding that entire region. Also there has been archaeological evidence showing that an enormous flood occurred in that region at precisely the time that Scripture says that it did.
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
dajstill
#6 Posted : Monday, August 06, 2012 9:04:13 AM

Joined: 11/23/2011
Posts: 748
Location: Alabama
I always am a little uncomfortable with the issue of Japhet, Ham, & Shem - because it has led to untold amount of racism and blood shed over the years with "the curse of Ham" being a justification for it.

First, I thought that it was Canaan that was cursed, not Ham. This is significant because the cry of "the curse of Ham" has led people to even this day declare all people of African decent a "cursed" people. What is true is that Cush, another one of Ham's sons was the father of Nimrod - who started much of the pagan worship we see today. However, this pagan worship can't be relegated to a small part of Africa, it is an entrenched part of every group on the planet.

The second issue is that with thousands of years of intermarriage as well as types of forced copulation there isn't a "pure" race on the planet. No one can say they are a decedent of Shem and not Japhet, or Ham and not Shem. Everyone is all mixed up together and now you are only a child of Yahowah by way of the covenant or you are not - that is the only clear familial line that exist today.

It is interesting to see where they all settled, but our concept being able to divide people up by Shem, Ham, or Japhet is just not possible. From my read of the time of Noah - all 3 brothers had the same father and the same mother, so they probably looked very similar. It takes hundreds and hundreds of years to get distinctions among people simply via environment (there is a tribe in China that immigrated from a country in southern Africa hundreds of years ago - they did not intermarry with the Chinese and they look almost identical with tribes still in southern Africa). The distinctions in look from the children of those son's could have only come from intermarriage of their family line.

I am a big fan of looking at the migration of the son's of Noah and seeing where they went and what happened with their children. However, Yah has told us that each man is judged according to his own works. People can be held in bondage due to a lack of information of the truth about Yahowah (whether intentionally corrupted via leaders, hidden from them, or never having the opportunity to see it). However, it isn't that Yahowah is saying people in 2012 are cursed because of Ham and thereby destined to a life of slavery and misery.

I think even when it comes to things like the war of Gog and Magog we have to understand that Yahowah was just providing an account of what He saw was going to happen because He is outside of time. People in that region aren't doing what they are doing because of the curse of Canaan - they are doing it of their own free will and their own deception. I don't think they are "destined" to do it so much as they are coming to the end of humanities continued downward slope. These people "could" choose a different route, but they won't.

encounterHim - I am with you. The flood story taking a turn to them repopulating the entire earth doesn't make scientific sense. How long would it take 3 couples to repopulate the entire earth? I would think that would take a thousand years! Each son took only 1 wife unto the Ark and there is no record that Noah's wife had any more children. The scriptures record the children of Shem, Ham, and Japhet as well as their children and so on. At the rate of their reproduction - it would have taken at least 1,000 years to repopulate. Also, the Torah does not allow for having children with your brother or sister. Just like it is very, very unlikely that Adam and Hawwah populated the entire earth after being expelled from the garden. Again, we have record of what children they had and Hawwah was not producing enough children to have the reproduction needed to start a population boom.
encounterHim
#7 Posted : Monday, August 06, 2012 9:21:53 AM

Joined: 1/29/2011
Posts: 868
Location: Houston, Texas
^
and besides that, most of the trouble in the middle east is coming from the arabs and they are reportely, form the line of, Shem, also.
cgb2
#8 Posted : Monday, August 06, 2012 1:46:55 PM


Joined: 5/14/2010
Posts: 657
Location: Colorado
Perhaps I'm reading too much into Numbers Chapter 12, but could be about rascism.
It's almost as if Aaron and especially his wife Maryim were looking down on Moshe's wife a Kushite (dark skined?), so Yah inflicted Maryim (Aaron's wife) with "leprosy - white as snow" until she repented.
RebelLibertarian2
#9 Posted : Monday, August 06, 2012 10:16:47 PM

Joined: 5/26/2012
Posts: 32
Location: Alabamy
cgb2 wrote:
Perhaps I'm reading too much into Numbers Chapter 12, but could be about rascism.
It's almost as if Aaron and especially his wife Maryim were looking down on Moshe's wife a Kushite (dark skined?), so Yah inflicted Maryim (Aaron's wife) with "leprosy - white as snow" until she repented.


Oh no, there's no racism in the Torah. Deut 15:6, "For YHWH your Elohim will bless you as he has promised, and you will lend to many nations but will borrow from none. You will rule over many nations but none will rule over you." isn't at all racist, and it definitely doesn't endorse a New World Order run by Jewish usurers and warmongers. Nope.
flintface
#10 Posted : Tuesday, August 07, 2012 1:46:37 AM


Joined: 1/19/2010
Posts: 674
Location: WA - The Evergreen State
You're absolutely right, RebelLibertarian2, the passage you quoted from one of the standard English translations does not promote a New World Order overlorded by Jews. How encouraging that you are capable of dragging your mind through its own minefields of confusion and deception to arrive safely at an accurate observation.

Now, I am curious about you. Every one of your posts today has suggested that we here are blind supporters of the followers of Talmudic Judaism. Yet you admit that you have read nothing Yada has written and have listened to only a couple of his broadcasts. Upon what are you basing your never-been-more-wrong assumption that this forum is a training camp for Cheerleaders For the Jews? And why would you suppose that Yada speaks for anyone other than his own self, or that any of us would presume to speak for him?

Let me invite you to relax, clear your mind, and read "An Introduction to God", which you can read or download as PDF files FREE OF CHARGE by clicking here. Read, verify absolutely everything that is said (translations of Hebrew words, quotes alleged to be from this or that source, etc.), then use that information to form your own conclusions based on the evidence you yourself have uncovered. If you are willing to do that, then you will have shown yourself to be someone whose opinions have merit and deserve to be listened to and taken seriously. If you are unwilling to do that, then you show yourself to be someone who prefers living in ignorance to putting forth the effort to educate himself, someone whose opinions are worthless, someone with whom I personally want to have nothing to do.

If that sounds harsh to you, I would suggest that you consider the possibility that your sensitivity comes from a fear of being wrong, and I encourage you to stand up to it.
The Bless Yahowah Web Site
The Shattering Myths Archives - with program descriptions (commercial breaks edited out)
RebelLibertarian2
#11 Posted : Tuesday, August 07, 2012 11:26:51 AM

Joined: 5/26/2012
Posts: 32
Location: Alabamy
flintface wrote:
Now, I am curious about you. Every one of your posts today has suggested that we here are blind supporters of the followers of Talmudic Judaism. Yet you admit that you have read nothing Yada has written and have listened to only a couple of his broadcasts. Upon what are you basing your never-been-more-wrong assumption that this forum is a training camp for Cheerleaders For the Jews? And why would you suppose that Yada speaks for anyone other than his own self, or that any of us would presume to speak for him?


Well, actually, as I've detailed in previous posts, I have read a fair amount of his writings (although I've only skimmed portions of his most recent ITG that I thought were relevant to subjects that I was researching) - it's just that it's highly inconvenient to listen to his radio show. Thus, I am fully cognizant that he pretends to oppose "Talmudic" Judaism, drawing a distinction between the practices of post-Babylon Jewry with the ostensibly-perfect instruction of the Torah. I know that the Talmud is derided nearly universally on this forum not just because it claims equal inspiration with the Torah (which the Torah doesn't explicitly endorse, of course), but because it even conceals aspects of YHWH's character as revealed in the TaNaKh.

Indeed, if it is Talmudism alone (i.e. not also the dogma of the Torah) that motivates the Jewish supremacism that all too many Jews throughout history have evinced, then of course Yada could and should eviscerate its drive for world slavery and usury. Indeed, if the above hypothesis be true, then its evil aims are contrary to the Torah, and neutrality towards them is unacceptable for them that observe same: every aspect of its wickedness (not the relatively trivial artifices by which Gentiles are decieved as to the true nature of YHWH, but also its assumed hatred for God's word and murderous machinations against Gentiles, must be exposed).

So, why does Yada refuse to address the world-dominating Talmudic threat? I can give him and others the benefit of the doubt; if y'all are truly ignorant, I can even offer a primer myself. However, what if the Torah is part and parcel of this Judaic-supremacist movement? If that were the case, just as any other secret society requires both a secret and a common doctrine, with the latter only hinting at the abominations of the former, so too would we expect that the Torah, the open doctrine, only hint at the supremacist aims of the Talmud, the secret doctrine. In turn, we would expect that the Torah partisans would not dwell upon the wickedness of the Talmud, lest researchers discover that both appear to be part and parcel of the plot. This is what we see (unless in ITG Yada offers an effective expose of Talmudist usury and warmongering schemes, which, judging by the love of the Rothschilds' State of Israel evinced by most posters, is far from the case).

flintface wrote:
Let me invite you to relax, clear your mind, and read "An Introduction to God", which you can read or download as PDF files FREE OF CHARGE by clicking here. Read, verify absolutely everything that is said (translations of Hebrew words, quotes alleged to be from this or that source, etc.), then use that information to form your own conclusions based on the evidence you yourself have uncovered. If you are willing to do that, then you will have shown yourself to be someone whose opinions have merit and deserve to be listened to and taken seriously. If you are unwilling to do that, then you show yourself to be someone who prefers living in ignorance to putting forth the effort to educate himself, someone whose opinions are worthless, someone with whom I personally want to have nothing to do.

If that sounds harsh to you, I would suggest that you consider the possibility that your sensitivity comes from a fear of being wrong, and I encourage you to stand up to it.


I will. If my Judaic-supremacist theory is correct, you're right, it's absolutely essential to completely comprehend its works, arcane and common.

Does ITG make any effort to address arguments that YHWH as described in the extant Torah is untrustworthy or that the Torah promotes arbitrary violence against innocents? If so, I'll read chapters that do so instantly (given that YY didn't, I doubt that ITG will, but please enlighten me if I'm wrong). Does ITG offer any proof of YHWH's existence? If so, I'll also read this instantly. Note, however, that, just as Yada et al expect us to distinguish between YHWH and Satan, both existing but only one according to them worthy of trust and love, so too is it necessary to establish that YHWH is indeed so if He really does exist.
RebelLibertarian2
#12 Posted : Tuesday, August 07, 2012 11:31:04 AM

Joined: 5/26/2012
Posts: 32
Location: Alabamy
One more thing, FlintFace, does a more accurate translation of Deut 15:6 reveal that it has nothing to do with usury and world domination? If so, I might just eat my words.
JamesH
#13 Posted : Tuesday, August 07, 2012 11:42:24 AM

Joined: 1/8/2008
Posts: 356
Location: Fresno, CA
RebelLibertarian2, who should dominate the world?
RebelLibertarian2
#14 Posted : Tuesday, August 07, 2012 12:51:05 PM

Joined: 5/26/2012
Posts: 32
Location: Alabamy
JamesH, I don't think that anyone should forcibly rule the world (and if someone succeeds in doing so, I'll be all about some space travel or guerrilla warfare). World history has long been characterized by abnegation of human rights (and of course it would be unfair of me to claim that Jewish philosophy has a monopoly on such cruelty): likewise, absolute spiritual, political, and economic domination of the world by any group (let alone one instrumental in current abominations) sounds horrific. If Yahudim / Torah-keepers have a moral philosophy to share, no doubt people will voluntarily come to it without coercion, no domination required.

What do you think?
SteveJ
#15 Posted : Tuesday, August 07, 2012 1:12:35 PM

Joined: 8/7/2012
Posts: 6
Location: North Carolina
RebelLibertarian2, Since this (Deut 15:6) is referring to a time yet to come, and a people (Yahudim) who are yet to be, I would say that it does not have anything to do with usury and world domination. As has been stated before, you cannot take any passage of Torah in isolation; context is the key. An accurate understanding of what Yah has said and or written would demonstrate that "lording" over someone else is inimical to His nature.

One can lend without interest, and rule without domination. Based upon the fact that Yah will write His Torah upon those with whom He renews His covenant, I would assume that they will understand His feelings on this matter.
I have lent tools and equipment to those who needed them, without payment and without interest--only expecting to get my tools and/or equipment back, and have ruled over my children without dominating them.

Yes, there are those of "Jewish" ancestry who are attempting to extract every bit of gain from those with which they deal, and there are many who have world domination as their goal--but they are NOT related to Yah, they repudiate Him, ignore Him, oppose Him, or all three.
Do not blame Yahowah for the actions of those who falsely claim to be His children, or even for those who correctly claim to be His children, as humans are humans, and can usually make a bad situation worse.

One last point: there are plenty of people (and plenty of sites) who point out every last flaw of the descendants of Jacob, inventing lies when they deem the actual flaws to be insufficient. There are very few if any others who point out the inherent evil nature of religion, any religion. If it is religious and known, you can count on it being exposed and opposed on this site. On the other hand, the Introduction to God is the introduction to God, not the criticism of everything in the world. If you have no interest in being introduced to God, and learning about His Torah, then you probably won't ever be happy here.

Me, I have my flaws, I have my concerns about what is happening in this world, I am deeply upset by what has been done by those who claim to be acting in God's name, but I want to know Yah. I want to understand more about Him, about his covenant, what He expects from me, what I can expect from Him. That is what this site is about, getting to know (yada) Yah.
JamesH
#16 Posted : Tuesday, August 07, 2012 1:30:21 PM

Joined: 1/8/2008
Posts: 356
Location: Fresno, CA
Well RebelLibertarian2,

What do I think?

I think as a Gnostic you have already Killed YHWH and as a Libertarian you hate YHWH’s moral judgments.

I don’t think you are seeking YHWH and His Torah other than to prove it wrong or that YHWH does not exist.

I am going to agree with flintface’s post after reading who you revealed yourself to be.


Why? We gather here to discuss Yahowah, His Word, His prophecies, and how those things which have happened throughout history and which are happening today prove that He authored His Word. We also like to fellowship with each other and to just hang out here when we have the time. The morality of the modern State of Israel is irrelevant to all that, and every opinion any of us might have on the subject of the morality of the modern State of Israel is equally irrelevant.

I perceive from the tone of your posts today that you've come here looking to pick a fight. Personally, I find you to be childishly obvious and hugely boring. Shoo, fly; don't bother me.
cgb2
#17 Posted : Tuesday, August 07, 2012 1:42:17 PM


Joined: 5/14/2010
Posts: 657
Location: Colorado
RebelLibertarian2 wrote:
One more thing, FlintFace, does a more accurate translation of Deut 15:6 reveal that it has nothing to do with usury and world domination? If so, I might just eat my words.

A standalone verse out of context, to support your position. Here's more of the passage:

Deu 15:1 “At the end of every seven years you make a release of debts.
Deu 15:2 “And this is the word of the release: Every creditor is to release what he has loaned to his neighbour, he does not require it of his neighbour or his brother, because it is called the release of יהוה.
Deu 15:3 “Of a foreigner you could require it, but your hand is to release whatever is owed by your brother.
Deu 15:4 “Only, there should be no poor among you. For יהוה does greatly bless you in the land which יהוה your Elohim is giving you to possess as an inheritance,
Deu 15:5 only if you diligently obey the voice of יהוה your Elohim, to guard to do all these commands which I am commanding you today.
Deu 15:6 “For יהוה your Elohim shall bless you as He promised you. And you shall lend to many nations, but you shall not borrow. And you shall rule over many nations, but they do not rule over you.
Deu 15:7 “When there is a poor man with you, one of your brothers, within any of the gates in your land which יהוה your Elohim is giving you, do not harden your heart nor shut your hand from your poor brother,
Deu 15:8 for you shall certainly open your hand to him and certainly lend him enough for his need, whatever he needs.
Deu 15:9 “Be on guard lest there be a thought of Beliyaʽal in your heart, saying, ‘The seventh year, the year of release, is near,’ and your eye is evil against your poor brother and you give him naught. And he shall cry out to יהוה against you, and it shall be a sin in you.
Deu 15:10 “You shall certainly give to him, and your heart should not be grieved when you give to him, because for this reason יהוה your Elohim does bless you in all your works and in all to which you put your hand.
RebelLibertarian2
#18 Posted : Tuesday, August 07, 2012 5:03:56 PM

Joined: 5/26/2012
Posts: 32
Location: Alabamy
On the Question of Usury:

The command to forgive the debts of fellow Israelites (but, perhaps non-trivially, not those of foreigners: of course, not forgiving voluntarily-contracted debts and engaging in usurious banking schemes are quite different) is a symbolic one based on the claim that, in the Millennial Age, Israelites will rule everywhere and lend money, somehow.

Of course, you are correct that "lending" is often not synonymous with usury. Apart from the fact that the Talmud (much of which is over 2000 years in the making) contains detailed information on the nuts and bolts of usury, keep in mind that, in this context, lending is paired with "ruling over nations".

So...

What is meant by ruling over many nations

"one can rule without domination" - So, the Yahudim will offer an "opt-out" for those that dislike their rules? Otherwise, "ruling" implies some degree of domination. It may not be as cruel as, say, that of Judeo-Bolshevik Russia, but a purified, divine people ought to be able to convince some to voluntarily join them and leave the rest of the benighted world to its own destructive purposes (save rescuing innocents or the like). If the Torah specifies that this is how the Yahudim are to rule, then I do stand corrected, however.


As for the contention that Deut 15:6 refers to the Millennial Kingdom or whatever it's called here,

First, context indicates that these commands are to now be fulfilled (i.e. debts contracted in this age by fellow Israelites are to be forgiven). SteveJ, am I misunderstanding your argument, or am I missing some indication that this is only to take place in the future? Also, how can it involve a people that didn't exist at the issuance of the command, given that it is addressed in the 2nd person? I understand that Yada theorizes that the Covenant has yet to be renewed: do y'all believe that its renewal would create a unique people distinct from Biblical Israel??

SteveJ wrote:
Yes, there are those of "Jewish" ancestry who are attempting to extract every bit of gain from those with which they deal, and there are many who have world domination as their goal--but they are NOT related to Yah, they repudiate Him, ignore Him, oppose Him, or all three.


The question of whether or not Talmudic Jews love or hate YHWH is seminal, and it cannot be proved in a single sentence. In determining the truth of it, we have many sources of information, though all are of course imperfect:

-The Torah's [disturbing, to me] endorsements of violence
-The fact that those of Jewish ancestry are generally vastly over-represented in criminal enterprises and wicked governments [which, like most of these facts, admittedly does have multiple interpretations. Hell, if the worst sin described in the Torah is doing evil in the Name of YHWH, misrepresented as "taking the 'lord's' Name in 'vain'" by shoddy translators, then we would also expect apostate Yahudim to be the worst sinners]
-The Torah's obsession with slavery
-The fact that Jews have long been inordinately influential in slave trades [including the trans-Atlantic one] and obsessed with enslaving gentiles; hell, the author of the most influential Zionist history of Jewry once called the greatest "persecution" of Jews by Gentiles the latter's refusal to allow Jews to keep Christian slaves and forcibly circumcise them!
-The fact that no copies of the Torah that disavow such violence are generally known, nor of interest to most Torah-keepers
-The fact that, though a prophetic work, it does not expose Judaic plots to Gentiles, let alone encourage or facilitate the defeat of said conspiracies [as far as I know]
-The rabid hatred of Gentiles espoused by Talmud, which isn't itself conclusive about the Torah, but, if it be in accordance with the Torah and it be the secret doctrine of the Jews [and Sanhedrin 59a forbids Jews to let it fall into the hands of Gentiles, admitting that it's so vile that Gentiles would take up arms against the Jews were its contents to them known], we would expect evil in the Talmud.
-The importance of the Talmud in preventing Jews from assimilating with their Gentile hosts and thereby retaining them for the destructive purposes of him that invented the Talmud.
-The disturbing similarity between [sure, the Talmudic world government could be a counterfeit of a righteous one. Paganism could also be similar to Xtianity because the former is a counterfeit of the latter, but does it seem probable? Would it be trustworthy for YHWH to not allow for greater distinction?] the Talmudic NWO and the Millennial kingdom
-The Zionism of most modern Torah-keepers. SteveJ, I'm guessing this doesn't apply to you, but Yada is a rabid Zionist (and far from alone) who no doubt will only admit to any Jewish crimes [even when they could be feasibly dismissed as Talmudic, not Torah-inspired] when pressed, presumably in order to conceal the destructive influence of the Judaic power.

Etc.

As I said before, I'm especially interested in ITG's apologia for verses of the Torah regarded by the politically-incorrect as espousing immoral violence. Anyone is welcome to direct me to chapters or pages of ITG that contradict this view and establish the morality of the Torah.
JamesH
#19 Posted : Tuesday, August 07, 2012 6:51:02 PM

Joined: 1/8/2008
Posts: 356
Location: Fresno, CA
Well RebelLibertarian2,

What do I think?

I think as a Gnostic you have already Killed YHWH and as a Libertarian you hate YHWH’s moral judgments.

I don’t think you are seeking YHWH and His Torah other than to prove it wrong or that YHWH does not exist.

I am going to agree with flintface’s post after reading who you revealed yourself to be.


Why? We gather here to discuss Yahowah, His Word, His prophecies, and how those things which have happened throughout history and which are happening today prove that He authored His Word. We also like to fellowship with each other and to just hang out here when we have the time. The morality of the modern State of Israel is irrelevant to all that, and every opinion any of us might have on the subject of the morality of the modern State of Israel is equally irrelevant.

I perceive from the tone of your posts today that you've come here looking to pick a fight. Personally, I find you to be childishly obvious and hugely boring. Shoo, fly; don't bother me.
pilgrimhere
#20 Posted : Wednesday, August 08, 2012 10:06:40 AM


Joined: 1/11/2012
Posts: 145
Location: TX
Evidently, you are confined to a paradigm … worse, a fixation. Until you become interested in discovering Yah through the evidence of His Towrah that reveals past knowledge of future events, nothing you learn, whether true or false, regarding the Yahudim (modern or ancient) will be beneficial or even relevant. You have already been informed that this forum is not for defending or accusing Yahudim but for discussing information related to Yah’s activity and instruction for each of us as individuals. Questions you have for Yada should be directed to him alone. He is well capable of speaking for himself. However, your error is not so much in misdirecting your questions as simply averting any interest in asking the right questions. Once you get past, “Does God exist?” the most pertinent follow up questions are, “What does He love/hate/highly esteem?” If you are not capable of starting at the beginning, then you may never comprehend the end. Please refrain from being a distraction here.
Correct answers are irrelevant until the right questions are asked. And only Yah’s perspective matters.
SteveJ
#21 Posted : Wednesday, August 08, 2012 7:31:21 PM

Joined: 8/7/2012
Posts: 6
Location: North Carolina
RebelLibertarian2,

First of all, I want to thank you for your questions, they have prompted me to consider how best to respond to you, and have forced me to think through how best to reply.

I should have been more explicit in what I wrote. I made assumptions that your understanding was more complete than it is.

You do not understand that just because someone calls themselves by a name does not mean that that name applies to them.
You do not understand that most, if not all of the "translations" of the Torah, prophets, and Psalms are misleading and harmful, deliberately so.
You do not understand that all religions are harmful, damaging, and causing destruction of your soul. This includes Islam, Judaism, Christianity, Buddhism, Hinduism, Shintoism, and so on. If it is a religion, it is harmful, destructive and leads away or blocks the way to Yah. Religion means “to bind”. That is what it does, it ties up, forces into conformity, removes the ability to choose and to exercise your free will.
You don't seem to understand that people lie.
And, most important of all you don't seem to understand that those who are not cut into the covenant that God offers are not Yahudim.
It is not a theory that the covenant has not been renewed, it is obvious. When the covenant is renewed, the Torah will be written within each and every beneficiary of the covenant. That has not happened, therefore the covenant has not been renewed. And yes in the "millenium" the Yahudim will be VERY different from those now in Israel; there will certainly be some who are there now that will be there then, but oh, yes, they will be different. Being cut into the covenant, accepted, adopted, empowered, and thoroughly cleaned up tends to do that to you.
Now as to some of the other things you wrote:
The labels people apply, even to themselves, are not accurate. That happens even when they are trying to be honest.
When it comes to relationship with Yah, those who call themselves "Jews" are really missing the point. They are following rabbinical Judaism, which is NOT in any way related to Torah observance.
Let me state this clearly and unambiguously: those who adhere to or practice rabbinical Judaism are not God's people. They may call themselves Jews, they may be descendants of Jacob, they may even know which of the twelve tribes they came from, but they do not know Yahowah, and He doesn't know them. They are not Torah “observant”.
The Talmud is NOT the Torah. The Sanhedrin does not represent Yah,
The Sanhedrin claiming to speak for Yahowah is like Mahmoud Ahmadinejad claiming to speak for the United States. Didn't you know that the Sanhedrin condemned the Ma’aseyah to death for speaking Yahowah's name?
The Torah speaks about being released from slavery—man, you obviously haven't read it, you are taking someone's word for what you believe.

Oh, where to begin and where to go in this.
I don't want to demean you or condescend to you. I also had to learn, to think, to understand, to change my mind, to come to some conclusions regarding much of what I believed, had faith in, trusted. (And every day, it seems, I find I have had to change my mind about someone or something else, so I KNOW I haven't got all the answers, but I AM learning).
It appears that you are looking in the wrong places for your information.
If you want to know about Yah, you have to look at what He told us about Himself and what is important to Him. That place is the Torah.
Torah doesn't mean Law. Torah means instruction, guidance, direction, recommendation, advice. You know, what a loving father would give to his child.

God doesn't push (force) this on us and He doesn't just hand it all to us, He expects us to learn, to think about what we learn until we understand it, then to apply that understanding.
It isn't secret decoder ring thinking, it isn't just revealed to a select few, but it takes some effort on your part. That is the way that relationships are built. If it isn't worth your time to get to know God, it isn't worth His time to get to know you.

Most, and sometimes all, people operate in a gray fog of deception and incomplete and inaccurate information. This fog, confusing and contradictory, is also known as “babel”.
In the Torah God tells us to walk away from that confusion and contradiction, walk away from religion, politics, monetary schemes, military power, and family and societal traditions and to walk to Him in His Way.
So if God is telling us to walk away from religious, political, economic, and military power then He wouldn't be saying that He wants to give us military, economic, religious and political power, would He?
And no the Yahudim in the 1000 year time of shelters will not need to give people the option of opting out of their "rule". They nations will have it, they will just choose to grab on to Yahudim

(/vent on)
I am going to “vent” here, vent my anger at the “nice” religious people in the next few lines.
Do you know God's name? Do you know His Son's name? I didn't.
Do you know God invites you to meet with him seven times every year? I didn't.
Do you know the one prerequisite and four conditions of the covenant that He offers to you? I didn't.
Do you know what He will do on His part if we fulfill the prerequisite and conditions of the covenant?
I didn't.
Why didn't I know these things, these crucial, essential things?
Why hadn't I heard about these invitations? Because of religion.
I was religious, I had been “born again” and I was a “Fundamental Independent Baptist”.
(/sarcasm on)
I was so sure that Christianity was right, you just had to be more strict (fundamental) about it than all those heathen, slacking, backsliding Presbyterians and Methodists (don't they know that the King James Version is the “Inerrant, Infallible Word of God”!?), not crazy like those Primitive Baptists and Pentecostals, (what a deluded, pitiful bunch of “Holy Rollers”, need to slap some sense into those idiot snake-handlers).
And those deluded Roman Catholics they've got to be stupid, brainwashed, or just plain ignorant to ever think the pope had any authority, especially since they had four popes at one time, how do they know they didn't depose the wrong one? (I was born into a Roman Catholic family, and started studying for the priesthood, so yes, I can criticize them -- I know them because I was one.)
And those Greek and Russian Orthodox people—they don't even know how to make a cross.
(/sarcasm off)
So I didn't know that all of that “Christianity” is paganism, Babylonian paganism.
I didn't know that I had been deceived, fooled, been brainwashed myself.
And I cursed my children because of it. How?
I brought them up in the church, I “brought them up in the admonition of the Lord”.
Who is this “Lord”? I thought it was God, but He hates being called that.
Translate Lord to Hebrew and you get Ba'al. Coincidence? I don't think so.
Did you know that the cross is an ancient Babylonian pagan sign?
Did you know God doesn't want us to kneel, bow down, or prostrate ourselves to Him?
Did you know that the dying god being resurrected is as old as Babylon (Tammuz), old as Egypt (Osiris), old as ancient Greece (Dionysus), old as Rome (Bacchus)?
Did you know that “Christianity” is based upon a mixture of Greek philosophies?
Mankind has been fed this BS for quite a few millennium now, and religious, pharisaic Jews have been in on it too. Rabbi doesn't mean teacher, it means great one.
(/vent off)

In a more straightforward manner, it appears to me that you are relying on a translation such as the KJV for your understanding of the Torah. This is a mistake. The deliberate obfuscations of what God communicated make me quite angry and should make you angry. We have been lied to and cheated. You can't trust any of the translations on the market. So, you might think, what can we trust, what can we know if what we have is so corrupt?
You can get a head start and a leg up with some of this by looking at the translations that are in the Introduction to God, and a list of resources is given in the first section, but check out the translation for yourself, do the work, it is so much more interesting and useful that way, and the insights you gain are beyond precious.
The oldest known Hebrew manuscripts are from the Dead Sea Scrolls (DSS). They are available online.
No, there is no complete copy of every book in the Torah, prophets, and Psalms in the DSS.
No, not all the scrolls that were found were Torah, prophets, and Psalms.
And yes, that is a lot of work to do.
Building a relationship takes effort, takes time, comes at a price. But, it is more than worth the effort when the relationship is with Yahowah.

What it boils down to is this: you are going to have to look at this for yourself, no one can spoon-feed this to you, this is one of those things you have to do for yourself, and if I read you correctly-- you wouldn't trust it anyway.

God gave you a nesamah*, use it.

*nesamah-- the ability to understand and to make moral choices, a conscience.
encounterHim
#22 Posted : Thursday, August 09, 2012 4:42:42 PM

Joined: 1/29/2011
Posts: 868
Location: Houston, Texas
^ Thanks, SteveJ
Very well put!
RL2 will appreciate the thoughtfulness, I'm sure.
Users browsing this topic
Guest
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.

YAFVision Theme by Jaben Cargman (Tiny Gecko)
Powered by YAF 1.9.301 | YAF © 2003-2009, Yet Another Forum.NET
This page was generated in 0.432 seconds.