The Lord speaking to Satan said, “I will put enmity between you and the woman, and between her seed and your seed” [Genesis 3:15]).
Which Satan? the one on his belly or the one that walked?
"And YHWH Elohim said unto the serpent, Because thou hast done this, thou art cursed above all cattle, and above every beast of the field; upon thy belly shalt thou go, and dust shalt thou eat all the days of thy life: (Genesis 3:14)
And YHWH said unto Satan, Whence comest thou? Then Satan answered YHWH, and said, From going to and fro in the earth, and from walking up and down in it. (Job 1:7)
We need to be especially vigilant and critical of the organizations we belong and contribute to. If any faith leader or believer is suspected, a cover up or silencing is absolutely the wrong path. Kids first, reputations will survive. Honest people have nothing to hide, and should always condemn this crime.
True -- the Vatican is probably as wealthy or wealthier than the British Royals.
And the history of the Church and "Christianity" is extreme (precedent setting) violence, topped off by
the most horrific inventions and innovations of instruments to torture people.
This "Christianity" was brought her by the "invaders" and the same "Crusade" thinking and "Inquisition"
mind-set was used to destroy the native people here -- once again in overwhelming violence against
wise and gentle people. Same for the Africans enslaved here. True to their worldwide Papal Edict re
native "pagan" people and Africans the RCC called for their "enslavement or killing."
Beware of those with the power to label other people --
How many native peoples did the Vatican label as "pagans ... only fit to be fed to the dogs"?
Over centuries how many women did they label "witches" because they were knowledgeable
women who studied plants which are our medicines. And who could treat illness and heal?
Those were the women they burned at the stake for centuries both in Europe and on this land.
VIOLENCE is the key to identifying evil.
The Vatican/RCC also remains a male-supremacist church which does still NOT recognize the
full personhood of females as it recognizes the full personhood of males. They continue to suggest
that our mothers, sisters, aunts, wives are "spiritually inferior" and bar them from authority and ritual
within the Church.
This is a church which underpins Elite-Patriarchy and which has granted license to exploit Nature
and all animal-life via "Manifest Destiny" and "Man's Dominion Over Nature."
We all know this exploitation is wrong and has harmed the planet -- and is also harming humanity
because we are part of Nature.
I think it is important to notice that this violent aspect of Christianity was not present in the original movement. Christians were punished and unaccepted until (about) 400 c.e. When the various creeds were adopted, when the empire began to accept (control) Christendom, that is when it adopted violence and other incongruent teachings. The scriptures even warn of this. It appears that this sort of ‘co-opting’ of the movement was happening to varying decrees even before the deaths of Paul and John (1 Timothy 4:1, 2 Peter 2:1-2). Now we have a lot of symbolism in Christendom, and it is used to control politics and individual thought, sadly.
The original followers of Jesus were JEWS
The original Christians were JEWS
Jesus was a JEW
There is no indication that Jesus was trying to create a new religion.
Jesus was in rebellion against the Old Testament which was written to cement patriarchy.
Jesus was in rebellion against the money-lenders.
And it is likely that Jesus was a RABBI and MARRIED to Mary Magdalene who is considered
Jesus' "Disciple to the Disciples."
The New Testament also has a lot of fingerprints on it as far as control and re-writing.
Editing -- information left out -- info changed -- and a lot of convoluted info.
It's an amazingly violent book and unlikely to have anything to do with true spirituality.
It also works to further patriarchal controls over societies.
Actually, I don't think any Biblical writings were produced until after 400.
The idea that this fakery changed the records of time -- mainly for the purpose of confusion as
far as I can see. We should straighten out the dates and return to the true dates.
Christianity is male-supremacist religion. It's teachings aim to control normal human sexuality ...
not only among their members but throughout all societies.
The Vatican considers democracy its greatest enemy because it protects citizens
from having religion forced upon them. Separation of Church & State guarantees your
right to freedom of thought, freedom of conscience, and free will.
It protects you from any religious organization forcing its beliefs on you.
I agree with much of what you say, however, my point is different from yours. I believe the Bible is a record of humanity ignoring God, and of His followers ignoring and twisting His instruction, again and again; in exactly the violent and patriarchal manner that you described. This pattern continues after Jesus. It is true that Jesus did not create a new religion. He said that he did not come to erase ‘The Law’ (what people call the Old Testament), but to fulfill it. True Christians are not to be tyrants or authoritarians, lording it over others. Those who take the lead are meant to serve, to lay their lives down if necessary. Many times, The scriptures tell us to imitate Jesus. Remember how he washed their feet. He says that it is the Jews that rejected him and their teaching. Archaeological evidence for the Bible’s age has been found in ancient Egyptian trash pits dating back to 100 c.e. The Dead Sea scrolls have a copy of Isaiah that dates to the same period and is virtually the same as the one we have today. History and tradition hold that the Bible writer’s and their message were not received well. Virtually all of them were tortured and killed by the same patriarchal authorities that you and I both are rejecting. The scriptures were later picked up by those seeking to use them as a control device. Throughout history it has been illegal to translate or publish these writings, yet it is still the most popular book in history, written in more than 2,400 languages. However, you will find few, if any religions that actually teaching what the Bible says. For example: Hell? Not literal in the Bible. Trinity? Not In there. Males dominating? Incorrect application (consider the feet washing, also that the scriptures many times appoint the men to first defend the widows and orphans, then their own women and families, lastly themselves). You say that the Christian religions are bad and full of error? I agree with you. But I believe it is because they are ignoring and gatekeeping scripture. I find that humans are often getting God’s messages wrong. Not the fault of the message or messenger, it’s the fault of the humans, especially the ones using the scriptures to get money, shiny hats, power and fancy cars.
At the least you have an open mind so continue on your search for truth.
Your library and internet give you great opportunities to study the history of the world and to find truth.
The Old Testament was written to cement patriarchy.
The New Testament features Jesus -- a Jew, a Rabbi as a rebel fighting the Old Testament,
the downgrading of women, the rise of the money-lenders, etal.
Both versions underpin Elite-patriarchy.
You have to understand that this "Jesus" figure has come around about three dozen times with the
very same story. Check into that.
Actually, Jesus wasn't trying to build a new religion/Church ...
and the original Christians were Jews ... and they were finally killed by those
building a new fake church -- Christianity.
Fascism isn't religion -- it's hatred and violence by the few.
Any tyrant rising wants to control all of media -- we see that today with Trump.
The Bible was written at a time when only scholars could read and write -- they worked for the church.
There are very few humans who are willing to be violent -- only about 3% of us wake up every morning trying
to figure out how to gain complete control over our fellow citizens.
That's hard for most people to believe ... because none of us think that way.
But this kind of thinking is suicidal.
So is Capitalism which was invented by Christianity when Feudalism was no longer sufficient
to run the Papal States.
Capitalism is a system intended to move the wealth and natural resources of other nations
from the many to the few. And it has been used successfully all over the world to do just that.
Doesn't matter where or on what issue you begin your search -- you will end up where you should be.
There should be a way to support the historiocity of your assertions. I will continue to dig. Also, I am wondering if you are equating the Talmud to the Bible. The Talmud is part of the foundation of modern Judaism, and it essentially reverses almost every Bible teaching. Humility is the quality God sought in humans biblically, but that is not so according to the Talmud. Also, everything that you mentioned previously as attributed to the Bible can be found in those pages. It is true that there is a modern connection between Christian and Israeli power structures. It is because many undisciplined Christian belief systems have politically supported Modern Judaism because of the belief that the original promise that God made to Abraham still stands and in turn, also view that the nation of Israel plays a role in prophecy (from books like "The Late Great Planet Earth" by Hal Lindsay). This is not accurate. Many times, it was written that Judaism and Christianity are not compatible. In the case of the Abrahamic Covenant, it was contingent on the peoples' loyalty, which faltered time and again, leading to their rejection by God in the case of the destruction of the first temple; and later again with Jesus. Additionally, considering Jesus and Christianity; despite similarities, no other living being has ever been shown to fulfill the prophetic identification requirements of the foretold Hebrew messiah. Not Horus, nor Sabbati Tsevi. The explosion of Christ's followers among the lower, poor and uneducated slave classes, despite their INTENSE persecution, speaks volumes to the spiritual importance of Jesus story. As to the dates for the writing and distribution of scriptures through history, they are reasonably verifiable through opposed and uninvested sources. In other words, experts that have no religious interests have published findings about the thousands of copies of scriptures that have been written in writing styles, various languages and with regional and historically correct materials over the course of a long period of time. Lastly, there are several key pieces of evidence (the Talmud, Tacitus accounts, Josephus' writings, and the mention of Pilate on a stelae) that undeniably indicate the existence of Jesus and the beginnings of Christianity as a peaceful and persecuted sect, written by his enemies and opposers. If these admitted his existence, not denying his followers dedication to peaceful Christianity, how can we allow the lense of history to do so? Again, Jesus taught humility, service and fine works that put God first, and caring for the weak and poor. Only those who try to imitate him are his real followers. Its is sad but true that many wear his mantle just to misdirect his sheep. Also, many are the ones spreading angry disinfo so that people may hear and avoid picking up the Bible to read any truth about the reality of Jesus.
First of all any male-supremacist religion is basic fascism... right?
Also from the highest perspectives, it is likely that many of the Biblical stories relate to aliens.
And the Vatican has made clear that even if that is so it's not a problem.
I think when I said Old Testament, that's pretty clear.
And without the Old Testament there is no New Testament.
But basically, like our nation's history and the history of the world ... it is basically "white male propaganda."
Notice that even in Arab countries, Jesus is a white man ... !!
Look for answers from the highest perspective you can reach ...
What was the motivation for creating organized patriarchal religions to underpin Elite-patriarchy?
What was the motive for destroying the standing of females in Jewish societies?
Jesus was speaking out against this ...
And, again Jesus is one of 36 or more of the SAME kind of figures all with the same background ...
born on December 25 ... and all the other details in common.
Actually that's the day that the sun/son stops in the sky before it begins its northward path to spring.
The original 13 apostles represent what were originally 13 month calendars based on the female body
which is how men used to tell time. It's why the number 13 became unlucky. And why Judas is a stand in for that lore. All of this has a lot to do with astronomy.
So, again I say, start anywhere with an open mind.
PS: What I meant was we need to drop BC and AD and terms like that and use the actual numbers ... pre the idea that the world is only 2,000 years old because of a fake coming of "Christianity."
Stop referring to 18th century when you can say 1785... it's confuses young students and makes it harder to track history.
I think the divide between us is simply this: I know the scriptures to be inspired of God, albeit often ignored or misused.
Male supremacy is deplorable, dishonest and shameful. I believe it is because the Bible is ignored.
It is written:
Revelation 19:10 At that I fell down before his feet to worship him. But he tells me: “Be careful! Do not do that! I am only a fellow slave of you and of your brothers who have the work of witnessing concerning Jesus. Worship God! For the witness concerning Jesus is what inspires prophecy.”
Here we can see that an angel considers himself and everyone else as slaves to the divine will. No one is supreme.
Men and women should all serve God and the collective happily, if not, forget it. They are not true Christians imo. We both complain about the same, in the case of those.
Also, have you ever heard the story of the angel that went to the shepherds camping in the field to announce the birth of the messiah?
That's bible truth there. It shows that Jesus cannot share the same birthday as the pagan sun god Mithras. In December, the mountainous region of Bethlehem is SUPER cold. Nobody is gonna camp outside.
From a scriptural perspective, nobody can be compared to the only son of the living God. If you read Proverbs 8, you will get some clues that suggest how one special servant was made first and used as an apprentice (8:30) to participate in the creation of everything else. This son sent as a sacrifice should be considered in all seriousness and reverence. The most painful experience a parent can have is to see their child suffer. In this case, God is the father of that child. If it was me, and I sent my son with an important message; and he suffered because of it, I would be the height of indignant if anyone mocked my child. Just sayin.
Please, I respect your opinion very much. It saddens me to see the positive message of the Bible used against people and perverted in society. You have all the right to be disappointed with the way these scriptures have been applied by the religious authorities of Christendom. Please continue to search and decide for yourself. If you pray, pray about finding the truth of things. We should carefully reason for ourselves and never just accept what people say, even the things I have said, for example, should be checked.
Revelation tells us basically everything you need to know about our own time and things to come. For example, consider the following:
Rev. 13:18
Here is wisdom. Let him that hath understanding count the number of the beast: for it is the number of a man; and his number is Six hundred threescore and six.
666 is the "numeric value" of the hexagram, aka the symbol of international talmudic "jewry", who control our material world. The hexagram has six points, six triangles and a six-sided polygon. Remember, the beast is a mortal man/people, nothing supernatural. The beast denotes the base nature of this man/people, and this "jewry" indeed is, base and beastly. Let's have a look at a few other passages:
Rev. 3:9 Behold, I will make them of the synagogue of Satan, which say they are Jews, and are not, but do lie; behold, I will make them to come and worship before thy feet, and to know that I have loved thee.
****
Indeed, those who call themselves jews today are mere fakers. The Bible tells us that ultimately being a Jew or an Israelite is a spiritual concept. Talmud-studying, world-wrecking and God-blaspheming kikes, aka the fake jews, are the furthest thing in this world of true Israel, those allied with God. Let us remember that "satan" is not a personal name, but merely means "adversary". The fake jews are in other words the synagogue of the adversary, the enemies of both man and God. But we who live under the oppression of these fake jews should remember that one day they will come crawling to us to worship at our feet - begging for mercy? I think so.
Furthermore:
**
Rev. 13:13-15
And he doeth great wonders, so that he maketh fire come down from heaven on the earth in the sight of men, And deceiveth them that dwell on the earth by the means of those miracles which he had power to do in the sight of the beast; saying to them that dwell on the earth, that they should make an image to the beast, which had the wound by a sword, and did live. And he had power to give life unto the image of the beast, that the image of the beast should both speak, and cause that as many as would not worship the image of the beast should be killed.
**
What is the beast, aka international jewry and its henchmen, up to here? The so-called "Project Blue Beam"? They will hoax the existence of extraterrestrial life, they will "maketh fire come down from heaven on the earth in the sight of men"? And then make humanity worship this image of the beast and finally unite once and for all under a "new world order" system, aka modern-day Babel? I think so, yes. Already now they're ramping up the alien hoax with Pentagon and CIA hinting at the existence of these fanciful make-believe beings. The hologram technology is also getting pretty advanced. Case in point: the SpaceX rocket in California just a couple weeks ago. People will believe it all.
Rev. 13:16-17
And he causeth all, both small and great, rich and poor, free and bond, to receive a mark in their right hand, or in their foreheads: And that no man might buy or sell, save he that had the mark, or the name of the beast, or the number of his name.
This settles it, doesn't it? Who runs almost all the world's banks? Who controls the wealth, the flow of money, who prints the money? The fake jews, of course. What is the mark of the beast, though? Physically such a thing as not yet occurred, but this must indeed suggest future events. One popular theory is that concerning the micro chipping of humanity like the cattle they are to the fake jews. This is probably all correct and already now there are indications of this very development.
Back when I began working in network security, before pizzagate. I used to see the "food code" that was used and had no idea what I was reading. Homeland security would show up, and I was in the dark about it. They literally hide in the plain sight of darkness. It's sort of like the servant in the bible who was fearful and could not see God's army surrounding them. Joshua emplored God, Jehovah for his eyes to be open. And like that, his eyes were open and saw a spiritual army surrounding the current physical army. Once I learned what it all meant, I went back and scoured everything. Connected the dots, connected the pieces.
*
Let's start with Moloch. Moloch = Molech. Which literally means King. The "CH" means Disgusting. So he is the Disgusting King. The God of Child Sacrifice. Satan the Devil hates humans so much killing the ones closest to perfection in sacrifice to him is the ultimate sin. Satan is not his real name. It's an insult to him, meaning resistor, slanderer, liar, father of the lie. Molech is another one.
The moment I saw Molech being used as many times as it was in reference told me all of this was true. People don't joke or throw around the name Molech so loosely. The average person doesn't even know who or what Molech/Moloch is. It's not common knowledge. I'm still trying to figure out why he was reinvented as a giant owl.
The part of the article that talks about the Seed; I get the reference they were going for. It's a very good thought. I will say it's a bit misinterpreted. Unless I'm reading it wrong. The Seed being discussed in the bible in that verse in Genesis is not speaking about children. The Seed is Jesus Christ. I'm not saying this article was wrong, I'm just saying we can address that portion a little more clearly:
*
At the time of pronouncing judgment upon the first rebels, Jehovah God spoke a prophecy, couched in symbolic phrase, setting forth his purpose to use an agency, a “seed,” to effect the ultimate crushing of the rebel forces. (Ge 3:15) Thus, Jehovah’s rulership, the expression of his sovereignty, would take on a new aspect or expression in answer to the insurrection that had developed. The progressive revelation of “the sacred secrets of the kingdom” (Mt 13:11) showed that this new aspect would involve the formation of a subsidiary government, a ruling body headed by a deputy ruler. The realization of the promise of the “seed” is in the kingdom of Christ Jesus in union with his chosen associates. (Re 17:14; see JESUS CHRIST [His Vital Place in God’s Purpose].) From the time of the Edenic promise forward, the progressive development of God’s purpose to produce this Kingdom “seed” becomes a basic theme of the Bible and a key to understanding Jehovah’s actions toward his servants and toward mankind in general.
*
God’s delegating vast authority and power to creatures (Mt 28:18; Re 2:26, 27; 3:21) in this way is noteworthy inasmuch as the question of the integrity of all God’s creatures, that is, their wholehearted devotion to him and their loyalty to his headship, formed a vital part of the issue raised by God’s Adversary. (See INTEGRITY [Involved in the supreme issue].) That God could confidently entrust any of his creatures with such remarkable authority and power would in itself be a splendid testimony to the moral strength of his rule, contributing to the vindication of Jehovah’s sovereignty and exposing the falsity of his adversary’s allegations.
*
Everyone reading this needs to hear this portion that Christendom will never teach you because they removed the name of God. The biggest conspiracy known to mankind. If you do not know the name of the one who created all of us, the one the bible says we can draw close to, then we have been covered in spiritual darkness. I am going to reply to this post about the name of God. Remember that Abraham was called God's friend. The Prophet Daniel was called God's friend and also was told to be very precious to precious to God. If we do not know the name of someone who is supposed to be our best friend and greatest ally, then we cannot properly speak to that person. There are many God's as we have discussed. The bible actually calls Satan the Devil "...the God of this system (this world)." We need to address our ally. In fact, the bible goes on to say that "Everyone who calls on the name of, Jehovah will be saved."
I have been paying extra attention to this thread. There seems to be sone work to be done. I keep thinking "innocent as doves, discreet as serpents".. Also "aim your blows", amiright? Good work
(Je·hoʹvah) [the causative form, the imperfect state, of the Heb. verb ha·wahʹ (become); meaning “He Causes to Become”].
The personal name of God. (Isa 42:8; 54:5) Though Scripturally designated by such descriptive titles as “God,” “Sovereign Lord,” “Creator,” “Father,” “the Almighty,” and “the Most High,” his personality and attributes—who and what he is—are fully summed up and expressed only in this personal name.—Ps 83:18.
Correct Pronunciation of the Divine Name. “Jehovah” is the best known English pronunciation of the divine name, although “Yahweh” is favored by most Hebrew scholars. The oldest Hebrew manuscripts present the name in the form of four consonants, commonly called the Tetragrammaton (from Greek te·tra-, meaning “four,” and gramʹma, “letter”). These four letters (written from right to left) are יהוה and may be transliterated into English as YHWH (or, JHVH).
The Hebrew consonants of the name are therefore known. The question is, Which vowels are to be combined with those consonants? Vowel points did not come into use in Hebrew until the second half of the first millennium C.E. (See HEBREW, II [Hebrew Alphabet and Script].) Furthermore, because of a religious superstition that had begun centuries earlier, the vowel pointing found in Hebrew manuscripts does not provide the key for determining which vowels should appear in the divine name.
Superstition hides the name. At some point a superstitious idea arose among the Jews that it was wrong even to pronounce the divine name (represented by the Tetragrammaton). Just what basis was originally assigned for discontinuing the use of the name is not definitely known. Some hold that the name was viewed as being too sacred for imperfect lips to speak. Yet the Hebrew Scriptures themselves give no evidence that any of God’s true servants ever felt any hesitancy about pronouncing his name. Non-Biblical Hebrew documents, such as the so-called Lachish Letters, show the name was used in regular correspondence in Palestine during the latter part of the seventh century B.C.E.
Another view is that the intent was to keep non-Jewish peoples from knowing the name and possibly misusing it. However, Jehovah himself said that he would ‘have his name declared in all the earth’ (Ex 9:16; compare 1Ch 16:23, 24; Ps 113:3; Mal 1:11, 14), to be known even by his adversaries. (Isa 64:2) The name was in fact known and used by pagan nations both in pre-Common Era times and in the early centuries of the Common Era. (The Jewish Encyclopedia, 1976, Vol. XII, p. 119) Another claim is that the purpose was to protect the name from use in magical rites. If so, this was poor reasoning, as it is obvious that the more mysterious the name became through disuse the more it would suit the purposes of practicers of magic.
When did the superstition take hold? Just as the reason or reasons originally advanced for discontinuing the use of the divine name are uncertain, so, too, there is much uncertainty as to when this superstitious view really took hold. Some claim that it began following the Babylonian exile (607-537 B.C.E.). This theory, however, is based on a supposed reduction in the use of the name by the later writers of the Hebrew Scriptures, a view that does not hold up under examination. Malachi, for example, was evidently one of the last books of the Hebrew Scriptures written (in the latter half of the fifth century B.C.E.), and it gives great prominence to the divine name.
Many reference works have suggested that the name ceased to be used by about 300 B.C.E. Evidence for this date supposedly was found in the absence of the Tetragrammaton (or a transliteration of it) in the Greek Septuagint translation of the Hebrew Scriptures, begun about 280 B.C.E. It is true that the most complete manuscript copies of the Septuagint now known do consistently follow the practice of substituting the Greek words Kyʹri·os (Lord) or The·osʹ (God) for the Tetragrammaton. But these major manuscripts date back only as far as the fourth and fifth centuries C.E. More ancient copies, though in fragmentary form, have been discovered that prove that the earliest copies of the Septuagint did contain the divine name.
One of these is the fragmentary remains of a papyrus roll of a portion of Deuteronomy, listed as P. Fouad Inventory No. 266. (PICTURE, Vol. 1, p. 326) It regularly presents the Tetragrammaton, written in square Hebrew characters, in each case of its appearance in the Hebrew text being translated. This papyrus is dated by scholars as being from the first century B.C.E., and thus it was written four or five centuries earlier than the manuscripts mentioned previously.—See NW appendix, pp. 1562-1564.
While it's true that vowel points are a relatively recent innovation for written Hebrew, there's still vocalization between letters which approximates vowels. For example for
@LYHW
there is vocalization of HW, which is consistent with YHWDH, but not with your pronunciation of YHWH as Yahweh.
That's not the issue. Your using a rubric of phonetics and etymology to suggest that the name should not be used at all. I wonder if it is better to try to use it with respect than to forget it altogether. My wife calls me "punkin". If she erased my name from important documents and wrote 'punkin' everywhere, even though she loves me, I would still be quite annoyed.
I think the point of using 'Jehovah' over 'Yahweh' is about name recognition. In literature and even in old US government documents (like early drafts of the constitution, if I remember correctly) Jehovah was used because that path of the word etymology gives us other named as well, like Jesus, Isaiah, Joshua, Jeremiah, etc. basically every bible name. If we change Jehovah to Yahweh, we should change those to. Personally, I find it easier to say 'Jesus' than 'Yeheshuah' or whatnot.
When did the Jews in general actually stop pronouncing the personal name of God?
So, at least in written form, there is no sound evidence of any disappearance or disuse of the divine name in the B.C.E. period. In the first century C.E., there first appears some evidence of a superstitious attitude toward the name. Josephus, a Jewish historian from a priestly family, when recounting God’s revelation to Moses at the site of the burning bush, says: “Then God revealed to him His name, which ere then had not come to men’s ears, and of which I am forbidden to speak.” (Jewish Antiquities, II, 276 [xii, 4]) Josephus’ statement, however, besides being inaccurate as to knowledge of the divine name prior to Moses, is vague and does not clearly reveal just what the general attitude current in the first century was as to pronouncing or using the divine name.
The Jewish Mishnah, a collection of rabbinic teachings and traditions, is somewhat more explicit. Its compilation is credited to a rabbi known as Judah the Prince, who lived in the second and third centuries C.E. Some of the Mishnaic material clearly relates to circumstances prior to the destruction of Jerusalem and its temple in 70 C.E. Of the Mishnah, however, one scholar says: “It is a matter of extreme difficulty to decide what historical value we should attach to any tradition recorded in the Mishnah. The lapse of time which may have served to obscure or distort memories of times so different; the political upheavals, changes, and confusions brought about by two rebellions and two Roman conquests; the standards esteemed by the Pharisean party (whose opinions the Mishnah records) which were not those of the Sadducean party . . .—these are factors which need to be given due weight in estimating the character of the Mishnah’s statements. Moreover there is much in the contents of the Mishnah that moves in an atmosphere of academic discussion pursued for its own sake, with (so it would appear) little pretence at recording historical usage.” (The Mishnah, translated by H. Danby, London, 1954, pp. xiv, xv) Some of the Mishnaic traditions concerning the pronouncing of the divine name are as follows:
In connection with the annual Day of Atonement, Danby’s translation of the Mishnah states: “And when the priests and the people which stood in the Temple Court heard the Expressed Name come forth from the mouth of the High Priest, they used to kneel and bow themselves and fall down on their faces and say, ‘Blessed be the name of the glory of his kingdom for ever and ever!’” (Yoma 6:2) Of the daily priestly blessings, Sotah 7:6 says: “In the Temple they pronounced the Name as it was written, but in the provinces by a substituted word.” Sanhedrin 7:5 states that a blasphemer was not guilty ‘unless he pronounced the Name,’ and that in a trial involving a charge of blasphemy a substitute name was used until all the evidence had been heard; then the chief witness was asked privately to ‘say expressly what he had heard,’ presumably employing the divine name. Sanhedrin 10:1, in listing those “that have no share in the world to come,” states: “Abba Saul says: Also he that pronounces the Name with its proper letters.” Yet, despite these negative views, one also finds in the first section of the Mishnah the positive injunction that “a man should salute his fellow with [the use of] the Name [of God],” the example of Boaz (Ru 2:4) then being cited.—Berakhot 9:5.
Taken for what they are worth, these traditional views may reveal a superstitious tendency to avoid using the divine name sometime before Jerusalem’s temple was destroyed in 70 C.E. Even then, it is primarily the priests who are explicitly said to have used a substitute name in place of the divine name, and that only in the provinces. Additionally the historical value of the Mishnaic traditions is questionable, as we have seen.
There is, therefore, no genuine basis for assigning any time earlier than the first and second centuries C.E. for the development of the superstitious view calling for discontinuance of the use of the divine name. The time did come, however, when in reading the Hebrew Scriptures in the original language, the Jewish reader substituted either ʼAdho·naiʹ (Sovereign Lord) or ʼElo·himʹ (God) rather than pronounce the divine name represented by the Tetragrammaton. This is seen from the fact that when vowel pointing came into use in the second half of the first millennium C.E., the Jewish copyists inserted the vowel points for either ʼAdho·naiʹ or ʼElo·himʹ into the Tetragrammaton, evidently to warn the reader to say those words in place of pronouncing the divine name. If using the Greek Septuagint translation of the Hebrew Scriptures in later copies, the reader, of course, found the Tetragrammaton completely replaced by Kyʹri·os and The·osʹ.—See LORD.
Translations into other languages, such as the Latin Vulgate, followed the example of these later copies of the Greek Septuagint. The Catholic Douay Version (of 1609-1610) in English, based on the Latin Vulgate, therefore does not contain the divine name, while the King James Version (1611) uses LORD or GOD (in capital and small capitals) to represent the Tetragrammaton in the Hebrew Scriptures, except in four cases.
In the second half of the first millennium C.E., Jewish scholars introduced a system of points to represent the missing vowels in the consonantal Hebrew text. When it came to God’s name, instead of inserting the proper vowel signs for it, they put other vowel signs to remind the reader that he should say ʼAdho·naiʹ (meaning “Sovereign Lord”) or ʼElo·himʹ (meaning “God”).
The Codex Leningrad B 19A, of the 11th century C.E., vowel points the Tetragrammaton to read Yehwahʹ, Yehwihʹ, and Yeho·wahʹ. Ginsburg’s edition of the Masoretic text vowel points the divine name to read Yeho·wahʹ. (Ge 3:14, ftn) Hebrew scholars generally favor “Yahweh” as the most likely pronunciation. They point out that the abbreviated form of the name is Yah (Jah in the Latinized form), as at Psalm 89:8 and in the expression Ha·lelu-Yahʹ (meaning “Praise Jah, you people!”). (Ps 104:35; 150:1, 6) Also, the forms Yehohʹ, Yoh, Yah, and Yaʹhu, found in the Hebrew spelling of the names Jehoshaphat, Joshaphat, Shephatiah, and others, can all be derived from Yahweh. Greek transliterations of the name by early Christian writers point in a somewhat similar direction with spellings such as I·a·beʹ and I·a·ou·eʹ, which, as pronounced in Greek, resemble Yahweh. Still, there is by no means unanimity among scholars on the subject, some favoring yet other pronunciations, such as “Yahuwa,” “Yahuah,” or “Yehuah.”
Since certainty of pronunciation is not now attainable, there seems to be no reason for abandoning in English the well-known form “Jehovah” in favor of some other suggested pronunciation. If such a change were made, then, to be consistent, changes should be made in the spelling and pronunciation of a host of other names found in the Scriptures: Jeremiah would be changed to Yir·meyahʹ, Isaiah would become Yeshaʽ·yaʹhu, and Jesus would be either Yehoh·shuʹaʽ (as in Hebrew) or I·e·sousʹ (as in Greek). The purpose of words is to transmit thoughts; in English the name Jehovah identifies the true God, transmitting this thought more satisfactorily today than any of the suggested substitutes.
Importance of the Name. Many modern scholars and Bible translators advocate following the tradition of eliminating the distinctive name of God. They not only claim that its uncertain pronunciation justifies such a course but also hold that the supremacy and uniqueness of the true God make unnecessary his having a particular name. Such a view receives no support from the inspired Scriptures, either those of pre-Christian times or those of the Christian Greek Scriptures.
The Tetragrammaton occurs 6,828 times in the Hebrew text printed in Biblia Hebraica and Biblia Hebraica Stuttgartensia. In the Hebrew Scriptures the New World Translation contains the divine name 6,973 times, because the translators took into account, among other things, the fact that in some places the scribes had replaced the divine name with ʼAdho·naiʹ or ʼElo·himʹ. (See NW appendix, pp. 1561, 1562.) The very frequency of the appearance of the name attests to its importance to the Bible’s Author, whose name it is. Its use throughout the Scriptures far outnumbers that of any of the titles, such as “Sovereign Lord” or “God,” applied to him.
Noteworthy, also, is the importance given to names themselves in the Hebrew Scriptures and among Semitic peoples. Professor G. T. Manley points out: “A study of the word ‘name’ in the O[ld] T[estament] reveals how much it means in Hebrew. The name is no mere label, but is significant of the real personality of him to whom it belongs. . . . When a person puts his ‘name’ upon a thing or another person the latter comes under his influence and protection.”—New Bible Dictionary, edited by J. D. Douglas, 1985, p. 430; compare Everyman’s Talmud, by A. Cohen, 1949, p. 24; Ge 27:36; 1Sa 25:25; Ps 20:1; Pr 22:1; see NAME.
“God” and “Father” not distinctive. The title “God” is neither personal nor distinctive (one can even make a god of his belly; Php 3:19). In the Hebrew Scriptures the same word (ʼElo·himʹ) is applied to Jehovah, the true God, and also to false gods, such as the Philistine god Dagon (Jg 16:23, 24; 1Sa 5:7) and the Assyrian god Nisroch. (2Ki 19:37) For a Hebrew to tell a Philistine or an Assyrian that he worshiped “God [ʼElo·himʹ]” would obviously not have sufficed to identify the Person to whom his worship went.
In its articles on Jehovah, The Imperial Bible-Dictionary nicely illustrates the difference between ʼElo·himʹ (God) and Jehovah. Of the name Jehovah, it says: “It is everywhere a proper name, denoting the personal God and him only; whereas Elohim partakes more of the character of a common noun, denoting usually, indeed, but not necessarily nor uniformly, the Supreme. . . . The Hebrew may say the Elohim, the true God, in opposition to all false gods; but he never says the Jehovah, for Jehovah is the name of the true God only. He says again and again my God . . . ; but never my Jehovah, for when he says my God, he means Jehovah. He speaks of the God of Israel, but never of the Jehovah of Israel, for there is no other Jehovah. He speaks of the living God, but never of the living Jehovah, for he cannot conceive of Jehovah as other than living.”—Edited by P. Fairbairn, London, 1874, Vol. I, p. 856.
The same is true of the Greek term for God, The·osʹ. It was applied alike to the true God and to such pagan gods as Zeus and Hermes (Roman Jupiter and Mercury). (Compare Ac 14:11-15.) Presenting the true situation are Paul’s words at 1 Corinthians 8:4-6: “For even though there are those who are called ‘gods,’ whether in heaven or on earth, just as there are many ‘gods’ and many ‘lords,’ there is actually to us one God the Father, out of whom all things are, and we for him.” The belief in numerous gods, which makes essential that the true God be distinguished from such, has continued even into this 21st century.
Paul’s reference to “God the Father” does not mean that the true God’s name is “Father,” for the designation “father” applies as well to every human male parent and describes men in other relationships. (Ro 4:11, 16; 1Co 4:15) The Messiah is given the title “Eternal Father.” (Isa 9:6) Jesus called Satan the “father” of certain murderous opposers. (Joh 8:44) The term was also applied to gods of the nations, the Greek god Zeus being represented as the great father god in Homeric poetry. That “God the Father” has a name, one that is distinct from his Son’s name, is shown in numerous texts. (Mt 28:19; Re 3:12; 14:1) Paul knew the personal name of God, Jehovah, as found in the creation account in Genesis, from which Paul quoted in his writings. That name, Jehovah, distinguishes “God the Father” (compare Isa 64:8), thereby blocking any attempt at merging or blending his identity and person with that of any other to whom the title “god” or “father” may be applied.
For me, the truth is so disturbing and makes me rage. To the point that i want to start hunting people without mercy. It's not even a point of consideration in my book. I wouldn't be much help because that would be stooping to their level. Maybe i can find other ways.
Those of us who have open minds are already aware . Please don't lump Christians together .. There are many different kinds of Christians , the only thing we have in common is a love of Christ . I think you would be amazed at how many followers of Christ believe this is biblical . I personally believe God is tired of the evil . Jesus told us hurting children was an affront to God and everything these monsters do is to offend him. . John calls himself Catholic and is doing everything he can to destroy our church . It would be hard to ignore this if you have an IQ over 100 .
If God was tired of the evil and if he is ALL powerful he would end the evil. If he can make a heaven where there is no evil and that is good, then he can do the same on earth. If he is the creator of everything then he created evil. And over and over in the Bible he approves of what we would deem evil as per the verse below
Deuteronomy 20:10-14New International Version (NIV) 10 When you march up to attack a city, make its people an offer of peace. 11 If they accept and open their gates, all the people in it shall be subject to forced labor and shall work for you. 12 If they refuse to make peace and they engage you in battle, lay siege to that city. 13 When the Lord your God delivers it into your hand, put to the sword all the men in it. 14 As for the women, the children, the livestock and everything else in the city, you may take these as plunder for yourselves. And you may use the plunder the Lord your God gives you from your enemies.
One translation says "take them into your household" another says "as your children" another "as your slaves". I trust that He included that in the scriptures for a reason. Likely that society was corrupt to an unfathomable degree. Archaeological evidence of massive pits filled with sacrificed children and women and pagan religious paraphernalia are common finds in those lands. Evil was constantly at the border and moving into their communities. The original inhabitants of the land must have bern terrible. If you continue to read, you will see laws that protect orphans, widows and foreign residents. That doesn't stack up with the picture of a nation of murderous child plunderers, does it?
I think He hates these things even mor deeply than we do. Here is my take on why he allows it:
1. It cant go on forever. It is a cancerous blight of depravity that requires an unsustainable society to allow evil on that level. It will end and if humans are to survive, they will need a new model for society. God is ready with that, his kingdom through Jesus. Jesus didn't mistreat anyone, and he demonstrated mastery over every institution and system, including the weather.
2: God has the power to restore and resurrect all that have fallen as victims to the satanic experiment. He has shown that this His intention. It is a core teaching, not 'immortal soul' or Hell/Purgatory stuff.
3: Because of the evil around us, every day MANY people are searching for and FINDING him. When this number goes to zero, I believe we will see something we have never seen before.
I don't read the bible and take everything literally . I think the old testament is more of a history book since everything before Jesus was changed with his arrival . What I believe is that Christ loves us all and in return we love everyone . The exception being of course people that hurt others . I don't really care too much about the details I just know when I do good I feel good . I guess I'm more of the hippy-dippy Christian. I love God with my whole heart therefore I love people [not evil ones ] with an open heart.
What exactly is the problem here? The Canaanites, whom the Israelites were given licence to exterminate, were a wicked people who practiced things like child sacrifice etc. What is evil about destroying such people? The men were to be killed, the children and women kept alive as slaves. Besides God has a right to do what he wants with his own creations. Fortunately he is supremely just so he only allows the destruction of the evil, which the Canaanites were. Furthermore, he wanted to place the Israelites with whom he made a covenant, in a new land of their own. The Canaanites were ripe for extermination and so they might as well make room for God's chosen.
So what is evil here, pray tell?
Furthermore, the only way you could say that God allows evil is to say that it was evil for him to create humanity, but I would assume that you like most people are happy to be alive, no? God gave humans free will. If he had not done so, humans would be like robots and not living beings at all. Now it's a human's own decision to do evil. God never taught them to do evil and indeed he punishes each human for their evil deeds. Humans have the possibility to do wonderful and beautiful things, but many use their cognitive abilities to do evil. The only way to rid the world of human evil is to wipe humans out completely, which God nearly did thousands of years ago. But then many would call God evil for doing so. Heathens will forever rage against the Lord and whatever he does in his perfect rectitude, there will always be complaining and ingratitude.
Hmmm so the children are to be taken as plunder and used as plunder. Somehow I thought people on this site were concerned about children and their welfare. Are children considered to be guilty if their parents are guilty? Are they to be enslaved for the sins of their parents?
Perhaps you don't understand what plunder is. When one country defeats another country they feel they have a right to take anything that belonged to those people and to make those people slaves. Plundering is what pirates did, what the Vikings did, etc. It is not considered a noble thing to do. Pillage is a synonym for plunder
As for free will, for free will is what makes evil possible. Children are raped, tortured and killed by people exercising free will. I would be glad for humans to have no free will to stop all the evil. So I would then be a robot, so what. Is my having free will more important than kids being raped. BTW humans seem to have no problem removing people's free will once they have abused it. That is why we have jails. Could God not remove at least those who abuse kids from the mix while letting the rest of us muck around with free will concerning telling lies or stealing pens from work. Humans understand that some crimes need to be stopped by removing the free will of the worst criminals. God if all powerful could do that too. Let us play out our free will on lesser crimes and not let kids have their minds and hearts scarred because of the free will of others.
Parents regularly restrict the free will of their kids. Good parents do not allow one child to beat up another child. They do not let infants use knives or give the keys to the car to 10 year olds. Yet God stands back and watches this horror on planet earth and claims to be a good loving parent.
Yes, the Israelites destroyed and plundered their way through Canaan. Too bad they didn't do more of it, but they were too weak to follow God's clear and severe commandments. The men were killed and the women and children kept alive. You might have a distorted view of what slavery usually meant throughout the millennia, but it was often not that bad at all. It varied a lot. For example, you and I are slaves. Yes, we are slaves of our governments and the power brokers of this world. You may not know it or feel it, but trust me, you are. The biggest problem is that most people actually think they are free and not slaves. Not good. At least past slaves knew what they were. Now, being a slave itself is not necessarily even that bad if you have a benevolent master. Our masters today are not benevolent, but psychopathic scumbags. Fortunately for the vanquished Canaanites, the Israelites were generally, I am sure, benevolent and good masters. After all the Israelites were in covenant with the supremely just God of this world, and so the vanquished Canaanites too partook of the blessings of the Father.
I don't think plundering and violence is generally good, of course not, in fact it's evil when perpetrated against the innocent. But when the creator of this world commands you to do so at the expense of a sinful people, who am I to protest? Now you probably don't believe in my God so you couldn't care less, but to me he is very real and his word is the law.
So you would rather be a robot then? Then there is no you, you never existed, nor did any other human. If you were not a human you could've never had this conversation or lament the fact that there is evil in the world (due to the sinful nature of humanity). Weird of you to think this way, but to each his own. At any rate, that is not how things are and we humans do exist as cognitive beings. You can't do anything to change that. That being the case, we should do our best to behave and use our existence to further good things. You are right when you say that good humans should stop bad humans! Exactly! That is our job. We should prove ourselves worthy of being God's singularly unique creations by fighting against evil. It's not God's job to go around fixing things that humans should be able to fix.
However, there have been times when God has very directly affected things. He wiped out most of humanity already thousands of years ago (you almost got your wish, heh!). Then, since humans remained exceedingly sinful even after this, he made a covenant with the Israelites. They too mostly degenerated over time and then came Christ to share the gospel with the world. No one can anymore claim that they don't have the key to living a good and moral life, or that they can not escape the evil of this mortal world by going to heaven through their trust in Christ. But anyway, don't worry, I don't think the evil in this world will be going on for much longer. The wicked are picking up the pace. The Bible tells us that a time will come when humanity will become so weak and degenerate that God will put a final end to it. That is when the wicked will be destroyed and the good will ascend to heaven. As you can see, God is no passive party in all this. Once humanity has filled the cup of its iniquity to the brim, that is when God intervenes one last time.
The catholic church has since its inception been one thing and one thing only.
Antichrist.
Sits on 7 hills? Check.
Changed Gods times and laws? Check.
Killed Christians for 1260 years(42 prophetic months)? Check.
Leaders who claim to be God on earth? Check.
Forbidding priests to marry? Check.
And the other 30 prophecies the Mother of Harlots fulfills.
One thing I don't do is judge other Christians Jesus told me not to . The Catholic church has been a target for the antichrist but since it was the first organized Christian church it was started with Christ as it's leader . Politics have tried to turn our church into something else but the majority of us are out trying to help people but we are not going to get credit for the good things we do only what evil people are doing to destroy us from the inside out . I think you are very well meaning but since my IQ is 145 your calling me stupid is kind of funny .
Jesus nor the apostles started the catholic church.
Use some of that monster iq and do some reading.
Your trinity god is an abomination.
Your sunday instead of the sabbath is an abomination.
Your holidays are an abomination.
Your theology is based on paganism. Your own leaders admit it...
The use of temples, and these dedicated to particular saints, and ornamented on occasions with branches of trees; incense, lamps, and candles; votive offerings on recovery from illness; holy water; asylums; holydays and seasons, use of calendars, processions, blessings on the fields; sacerdotal vestments, the tonsure, the ring in marriage, turning to the East, images at a later date, perhaps the ecclesiastical chant, and the Kyrie Eleison,
are all of pagan origin
, and sanctified by their adoption into the Church." -Cardinal Newman
I have never understood why so many continue on in their participation. When I first learned these things, I had to start over. The Bible is real... It can lead people to the truth.
It was a good post I just wanted you to understand we aren't all alike . I feel like a lot of Christians are so terrified of what's going on they refuse to see it. I personally am not afraid because of my religion. I wish I could make people see what you posted but its hard when people stick their head in the sand
It only because they are not evil. its too hard for a normal person to believe in the extent of all the depravity, try sticking to the financial aspects of stuff.
When things like crazy high art prices for a crappy art piece gets mentioned I'll causally say "oh isn't that how they launder money as a cover for human trafficking?" and they are like "oh. well, huh." Or I'll say when there is an opioid death on the news, "there is huge money in organ trafficking." seeds planted.
It does. This one is especially quite amazing to me considering how rampant human, organ and sex trafficking is all around the world right now: " ...
the merchants of the earth
will weep and mourn over her, for no one buys
their merchandise
anymore: merchandise of gold and silver, precious stones and pearls, fine linen and purple, silk and scarlet, every kind of citron wood, every kind of object of ivory, every kind of object of most precious wood, bronze, iron, and marble; and cinnamon and incense, fragrant oil and frankincense, wine and oil, fine flour and wheat, cattle and sheep, horses and chariots, and
bodies and souls of men
." Revelation 18:11-13
▼ Random101
Which Satan? the one on his belly or the one that walked?
"And YHWH Elohim said unto the serpent, Because thou hast done this, thou art cursed above all cattle, and above every beast of the field; upon thy belly shalt thou go, and dust shalt thou eat all the days of thy life: (Genesis 3:14)
And YHWH said unto Satan, Whence comest thou? Then Satan answered YHWH, and said, From going to and fro in the earth, and from walking up and down in it. (Job 1:7)
▼ Psalm144-1
This was a very well done editorial. Thank you for sharing!
▼ GreenDell144
We need to be especially vigilant and critical of the organizations we belong and contribute to. If any faith leader or believer is suspected, a cover up or silencing is absolutely the wrong path. Kids first, reputations will survive. Honest people have nothing to hide, and should always condemn this crime.
▼ Votescam
True -- the Vatican is probably as wealthy or wealthier than the British Royals. And the history of the Church and "Christianity" is extreme (precedent setting) violence, topped off by the most horrific inventions and innovations of instruments to torture people. This "Christianity" was brought her by the "invaders" and the same "Crusade" thinking and "Inquisition" mind-set was used to destroy the native people here -- once again in overwhelming violence against wise and gentle people. Same for the Africans enslaved here. True to their worldwide Papal Edict re native "pagan" people and Africans the RCC called for their "enslavement or killing."
Beware of those with the power to label other people -- How many native peoples did the Vatican label as "pagans ... only fit to be fed to the dogs"? Over centuries how many women did they label "witches" because they were knowledgeable women who studied plants which are our medicines. And who could treat illness and heal? Those were the women they burned at the stake for centuries both in Europe and on this land.
VIOLENCE is the key to identifying evil.
The Vatican/RCC also remains a male-supremacist church which does still NOT recognize the full personhood of females as it recognizes the full personhood of males. They continue to suggest that our mothers, sisters, aunts, wives are "spiritually inferior" and bar them from authority and ritual within the Church. This is a church which underpins Elite-Patriarchy and which has granted license to exploit Nature and all animal-life via "Manifest Destiny" and "Man's Dominion Over Nature." We all know this exploitation is wrong and has harmed the planet -- and is also harming humanity because we are part of Nature.
STOP supporting male-supremacist religion.
▼ GreenDell144
I think it is important to notice that this violent aspect of Christianity was not present in the original movement. Christians were punished and unaccepted until (about) 400 c.e. When the various creeds were adopted, when the empire began to accept (control) Christendom, that is when it adopted violence and other incongruent teachings. The scriptures even warn of this. It appears that this sort of ‘co-opting’ of the movement was happening to varying decrees even before the deaths of Paul and John (1 Timothy 4:1, 2 Peter 2:1-2). Now we have a lot of symbolism in Christendom, and it is used to control politics and individual thought, sadly.
▼ Votescam
The original followers of Jesus were JEWS The original Christians were JEWS Jesus was a JEW
There is no indication that Jesus was trying to create a new religion. Jesus was in rebellion against the Old Testament which was written to cement patriarchy. Jesus was in rebellion against the money-lenders. And it is likely that Jesus was a RABBI and MARRIED to Mary Magdalene who is considered Jesus' "Disciple to the Disciples."
The New Testament also has a lot of fingerprints on it as far as control and re-writing. Editing -- information left out -- info changed -- and a lot of convoluted info. It's an amazingly violent book and unlikely to have anything to do with true spirituality. It also works to further patriarchal controls over societies. Actually, I don't think any Biblical writings were produced until after 400.
The idea that this fakery changed the records of time -- mainly for the purpose of confusion as far as I can see. We should straighten out the dates and return to the true dates.
Christianity is male-supremacist religion. It's teachings aim to control normal human sexuality ... not only among their members but throughout all societies.
The Vatican considers democracy its greatest enemy because it protects citizens from having religion forced upon them. Separation of Church & State guarantees your right to freedom of thought, freedom of conscience, and free will. It protects you from any religious organization forcing its beliefs on you.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jewish_Christian
▼ GreenDell144
I agree with much of what you say, however, my point is different from yours. I believe the Bible is a record of humanity ignoring God, and of His followers ignoring and twisting His instruction, again and again; in exactly the violent and patriarchal manner that you described. This pattern continues after Jesus. It is true that Jesus did not create a new religion. He said that he did not come to erase ‘The Law’ (what people call the Old Testament), but to fulfill it. True Christians are not to be tyrants or authoritarians, lording it over others. Those who take the lead are meant to serve, to lay their lives down if necessary. Many times, The scriptures tell us to imitate Jesus. Remember how he washed their feet. He says that it is the Jews that rejected him and their teaching. Archaeological evidence for the Bible’s age has been found in ancient Egyptian trash pits dating back to 100 c.e. The Dead Sea scrolls have a copy of Isaiah that dates to the same period and is virtually the same as the one we have today. History and tradition hold that the Bible writer’s and their message were not received well. Virtually all of them were tortured and killed by the same patriarchal authorities that you and I both are rejecting. The scriptures were later picked up by those seeking to use them as a control device. Throughout history it has been illegal to translate or publish these writings, yet it is still the most popular book in history, written in more than 2,400 languages. However, you will find few, if any religions that actually teaching what the Bible says. For example: Hell? Not literal in the Bible. Trinity? Not In there. Males dominating? Incorrect application (consider the feet washing, also that the scriptures many times appoint the men to first defend the widows and orphans, then their own women and families, lastly themselves). You say that the Christian religions are bad and full of error? I agree with you. But I believe it is because they are ignoring and gatekeeping scripture. I find that humans are often getting God’s messages wrong. Not the fault of the message or messenger, it’s the fault of the humans, especially the ones using the scriptures to get money, shiny hats, power and fancy cars.
▼ Votescam
Green --
At the least you have an open mind so continue on your search for truth. Your library and internet give you great opportunities to study the history of the world and to find truth.
The Old Testament was written to cement patriarchy. The New Testament features Jesus -- a Jew, a Rabbi as a rebel fighting the Old Testament, the downgrading of women, the rise of the money-lenders, etal. Both versions underpin Elite-patriarchy.
You have to understand that this "Jesus" figure has come around about three dozen times with the very same story. Check into that.
Actually, Jesus wasn't trying to build a new religion/Church ... and the original Christians were Jews ... and they were finally killed by those building a new fake church -- Christianity.
Fascism isn't religion -- it's hatred and violence by the few.
Any tyrant rising wants to control all of media -- we see that today with Trump.
The Bible was written at a time when only scholars could read and write -- they worked for the church.
There are very few humans who are willing to be violent -- only about 3% of us wake up every morning trying to figure out how to gain complete control over our fellow citizens. That's hard for most people to believe ... because none of us think that way.
But this kind of thinking is suicidal. So is Capitalism which was invented by Christianity when Feudalism was no longer sufficient to run the Papal States.
Capitalism is a system intended to move the wealth and natural resources of other nations from the many to the few. And it has been used successfully all over the world to do just that.
Doesn't matter where or on what issue you begin your search -- you will end up where you should be.
Start anywhere!
:)
▼ GreenDell144
There should be a way to support the historiocity of your assertions. I will continue to dig. Also, I am wondering if you are equating the Talmud to the Bible. The Talmud is part of the foundation of modern Judaism, and it essentially reverses almost every Bible teaching. Humility is the quality God sought in humans biblically, but that is not so according to the Talmud. Also, everything that you mentioned previously as attributed to the Bible can be found in those pages. It is true that there is a modern connection between Christian and Israeli power structures. It is because many undisciplined Christian belief systems have politically supported Modern Judaism because of the belief that the original promise that God made to Abraham still stands and in turn, also view that the nation of Israel plays a role in prophecy (from books like "The Late Great Planet Earth" by Hal Lindsay). This is not accurate. Many times, it was written that Judaism and Christianity are not compatible. In the case of the Abrahamic Covenant, it was contingent on the peoples' loyalty, which faltered time and again, leading to their rejection by God in the case of the destruction of the first temple; and later again with Jesus. Additionally, considering Jesus and Christianity; despite similarities, no other living being has ever been shown to fulfill the prophetic identification requirements of the foretold Hebrew messiah. Not Horus, nor Sabbati Tsevi. The explosion of Christ's followers among the lower, poor and uneducated slave classes, despite their INTENSE persecution, speaks volumes to the spiritual importance of Jesus story. As to the dates for the writing and distribution of scriptures through history, they are reasonably verifiable through opposed and uninvested sources. In other words, experts that have no religious interests have published findings about the thousands of copies of scriptures that have been written in writing styles, various languages and with regional and historically correct materials over the course of a long period of time. Lastly, there are several key pieces of evidence (the Talmud, Tacitus accounts, Josephus' writings, and the mention of Pilate on a stelae) that undeniably indicate the existence of Jesus and the beginnings of Christianity as a peaceful and persecuted sect, written by his enemies and opposers. If these admitted his existence, not denying his followers dedication to peaceful Christianity, how can we allow the lense of history to do so? Again, Jesus taught humility, service and fine works that put God first, and caring for the weak and poor. Only those who try to imitate him are his real followers. Its is sad but true that many wear his mantle just to misdirect his sheep. Also, many are the ones spreading angry disinfo so that people may hear and avoid picking up the Bible to read any truth about the reality of Jesus.
▼ Votescam
Green -
First of all any male-supremacist religion is basic fascism... right?
Also from the highest perspectives, it is likely that many of the Biblical stories relate to aliens. And the Vatican has made clear that even if that is so it's not a problem.
I think when I said Old Testament, that's pretty clear.
And without the Old Testament there is no New Testament.
But basically, like our nation's history and the history of the world ... it is basically "white male propaganda."
Notice that even in Arab countries, Jesus is a white man ... !!
Look for answers from the highest perspective you can reach ...
What was the motivation for creating organized patriarchal religions to underpin Elite-patriarchy?
What was the motive for destroying the standing of females in Jewish societies?
Jesus was speaking out against this ...
And, again Jesus is one of 36 or more of the SAME kind of figures all with the same background ... born on December 25 ... and all the other details in common. Actually that's the day that the sun/son stops in the sky before it begins its northward path to spring.
The original 13 apostles represent what were originally 13 month calendars based on the female body which is how men used to tell time. It's why the number 13 became unlucky. And why Judas is a stand in for that lore. All of this has a lot to do with astronomy.
So, again I say, start anywhere with an open mind.
PS: What I meant was we need to drop BC and AD and terms like that and use the actual numbers ... pre the idea that the world is only 2,000 years old because of a fake coming of "Christianity." Stop referring to 18th century when you can say 1785... it's confuses young students and makes it harder to track history.
▼ GreenDell144
I think the divide between us is simply this: I know the scriptures to be inspired of God, albeit often ignored or misused.
Male supremacy is deplorable, dishonest and shameful. I believe it is because the Bible is ignored.
It is written: Revelation 19:10 At that I fell down before his feet to worship him. But he tells me: “Be careful! Do not do that! I am only a fellow slave of you and of your brothers who have the work of witnessing concerning Jesus. Worship God! For the witness concerning Jesus is what inspires prophecy.”
Here we can see that an angel considers himself and everyone else as slaves to the divine will. No one is supreme.
Men and women should all serve God and the collective happily, if not, forget it. They are not true Christians imo. We both complain about the same, in the case of those.
Also, have you ever heard the story of the angel that went to the shepherds camping in the field to announce the birth of the messiah?
That's bible truth there. It shows that Jesus cannot share the same birthday as the pagan sun god Mithras. In December, the mountainous region of Bethlehem is SUPER cold. Nobody is gonna camp outside.
From a scriptural perspective, nobody can be compared to the only son of the living God. If you read Proverbs 8, you will get some clues that suggest how one special servant was made first and used as an apprentice (8:30) to participate in the creation of everything else. This son sent as a sacrifice should be considered in all seriousness and reverence. The most painful experience a parent can have is to see their child suffer. In this case, God is the father of that child. If it was me, and I sent my son with an important message; and he suffered because of it, I would be the height of indignant if anyone mocked my child. Just sayin.
▼ Votescam
Green --
OK .. got you ... but here's the problem ... you can't have a BELIEF SYSTEM and an open mind...
A BELIEF SYSTEM IS THE END ... NOT THE BEGINNING OF ALL WISDOM.
The Bible is written by men who imposed male-supremacy on our societies.
Good luck there ...
▼ GreenDell144
Please, I respect your opinion very much. It saddens me to see the positive message of the Bible used against people and perverted in society. You have all the right to be disappointed with the way these scriptures have been applied by the religious authorities of Christendom. Please continue to search and decide for yourself. If you pray, pray about finding the truth of things. We should carefully reason for ourselves and never just accept what people say, even the things I have said, for example, should be checked.
▼ Hagen18
Revelation tells us basically everything you need to know about our own time and things to come. For example, consider the following:
Rev. 13:18 Here is wisdom. Let him that hath understanding count the number of the beast: for it is the number of a man; and his number is Six hundred threescore and six.
666 is the "numeric value" of the hexagram, aka the symbol of international talmudic "jewry", who control our material world. The hexagram has six points, six triangles and a six-sided polygon. Remember, the beast is a mortal man/people, nothing supernatural. The beast denotes the base nature of this man/people, and this "jewry" indeed is, base and beastly. Let's have a look at a few other passages:
Rev. 3:9 Behold, I will make them of the synagogue of Satan, which say they are Jews, and are not, but do lie; behold, I will make them to come and worship before thy feet, and to know that I have loved thee. ****
Indeed, those who call themselves jews today are mere fakers. The Bible tells us that ultimately being a Jew or an Israelite is a spiritual concept. Talmud-studying, world-wrecking and God-blaspheming kikes, aka the fake jews, are the furthest thing in this world of true Israel, those allied with God. Let us remember that "satan" is not a personal name, but merely means "adversary". The fake jews are in other words the synagogue of the adversary, the enemies of both man and God. But we who live under the oppression of these fake jews should remember that one day they will come crawling to us to worship at our feet - begging for mercy? I think so.
Furthermore: ** Rev. 13:13-15 And he doeth great wonders, so that he maketh fire come down from heaven on the earth in the sight of men, And deceiveth them that dwell on the earth by the means of those miracles which he had power to do in the sight of the beast; saying to them that dwell on the earth, that they should make an image to the beast, which had the wound by a sword, and did live. And he had power to give life unto the image of the beast, that the image of the beast should both speak, and cause that as many as would not worship the image of the beast should be killed. **
What is the beast, aka international jewry and its henchmen, up to here? The so-called "Project Blue Beam"? They will hoax the existence of extraterrestrial life, they will "maketh fire come down from heaven on the earth in the sight of men"? And then make humanity worship this image of the beast and finally unite once and for all under a "new world order" system, aka modern-day Babel? I think so, yes. Already now they're ramping up the alien hoax with Pentagon and CIA hinting at the existence of these fanciful make-believe beings. The hologram technology is also getting pretty advanced. Case in point: the SpaceX rocket in California just a couple weeks ago. People will believe it all.
Rev. 13:16-17 And he causeth all, both small and great, rich and poor, free and bond, to receive a mark in their right hand, or in their foreheads: And that no man might buy or sell, save he that had the mark, or the name of the beast, or the number of his name.
This settles it, doesn't it? Who runs almost all the world's banks? Who controls the wealth, the flow of money, who prints the money? The fake jews, of course. What is the mark of the beast, though? Physically such a thing as not yet occurred, but this must indeed suggest future events. One popular theory is that concerning the micro chipping of humanity like the cattle they are to the fake jews. This is probably all correct and already now there are indications of this very development.
▼ dreamdigital
Back when I began working in network security, before pizzagate. I used to see the "food code" that was used and had no idea what I was reading. Homeland security would show up, and I was in the dark about it. They literally hide in the plain sight of darkness. It's sort of like the servant in the bible who was fearful and could not see God's army surrounding them. Joshua emplored God, Jehovah for his eyes to be open. And like that, his eyes were open and saw a spiritual army surrounding the current physical army. Once I learned what it all meant, I went back and scoured everything. Connected the dots, connected the pieces. * Let's start with Moloch. Moloch = Molech. Which literally means King. The "CH" means Disgusting. So he is the Disgusting King. The God of Child Sacrifice. Satan the Devil hates humans so much killing the ones closest to perfection in sacrifice to him is the ultimate sin. Satan is not his real name. It's an insult to him, meaning resistor, slanderer, liar, father of the lie. Molech is another one. The moment I saw Molech being used as many times as it was in reference told me all of this was true. People don't joke or throw around the name Molech so loosely. The average person doesn't even know who or what Molech/Moloch is. It's not common knowledge. I'm still trying to figure out why he was reinvented as a giant owl. The part of the article that talks about the Seed; I get the reference they were going for. It's a very good thought. I will say it's a bit misinterpreted. Unless I'm reading it wrong. The Seed being discussed in the bible in that verse in Genesis is not speaking about children. The Seed is Jesus Christ. I'm not saying this article was wrong, I'm just saying we can address that portion a little more clearly: * At the time of pronouncing judgment upon the first rebels, Jehovah God spoke a prophecy, couched in symbolic phrase, setting forth his purpose to use an agency, a “seed,” to effect the ultimate crushing of the rebel forces. (Ge 3:15) Thus, Jehovah’s rulership, the expression of his sovereignty, would take on a new aspect or expression in answer to the insurrection that had developed. The progressive revelation of “the sacred secrets of the kingdom” (Mt 13:11) showed that this new aspect would involve the formation of a subsidiary government, a ruling body headed by a deputy ruler. The realization of the promise of the “seed” is in the kingdom of Christ Jesus in union with his chosen associates. (Re 17:14; see JESUS CHRIST [His Vital Place in God’s Purpose].) From the time of the Edenic promise forward, the progressive development of God’s purpose to produce this Kingdom “seed” becomes a basic theme of the Bible and a key to understanding Jehovah’s actions toward his servants and toward mankind in general. * God’s delegating vast authority and power to creatures (Mt 28:18; Re 2:26, 27; 3:21) in this way is noteworthy inasmuch as the question of the integrity of all God’s creatures, that is, their wholehearted devotion to him and their loyalty to his headship, formed a vital part of the issue raised by God’s Adversary. (See INTEGRITY [Involved in the supreme issue].) That God could confidently entrust any of his creatures with such remarkable authority and power would in itself be a splendid testimony to the moral strength of his rule, contributing to the vindication of Jehovah’s sovereignty and exposing the falsity of his adversary’s allegations. * Everyone reading this needs to hear this portion that Christendom will never teach you because they removed the name of God. The biggest conspiracy known to mankind. If you do not know the name of the one who created all of us, the one the bible says we can draw close to, then we have been covered in spiritual darkness. I am going to reply to this post about the name of God. Remember that Abraham was called God's friend. The Prophet Daniel was called God's friend and also was told to be very precious to precious to God. If we do not know the name of someone who is supposed to be our best friend and greatest ally, then we cannot properly speak to that person. There are many God's as we have discussed. The bible actually calls Satan the Devil "...the God of this system (this world)." We need to address our ally. In fact, the bible goes on to say that "Everyone who calls on the name of, Jehovah will be saved."
▼ GreenDell144
I have been paying extra attention to this thread. There seems to be sone work to be done. I keep thinking "innocent as doves, discreet as serpents".. Also "aim your blows", amiright? Good work
▼ dreamdigital
Also, do not throw your pearls before swine.
▼ jumpinJack
Funny thing 'yeast'..... I think your missing something!
▼ dreamdigital
JEHOVAH
(Je·hoʹvah) [the causative form, the imperfect state, of the Heb. verb ha·wahʹ (become); meaning “He Causes to Become”].
The personal name of God. (Isa 42:8; 54:5) Though Scripturally designated by such descriptive titles as “God,” “Sovereign Lord,” “Creator,” “Father,” “the Almighty,” and “the Most High,” his personality and attributes—who and what he is—are fully summed up and expressed only in this personal name.—Ps 83:18.
Correct Pronunciation of the Divine Name. “Jehovah” is the best known English pronunciation of the divine name, although “Yahweh” is favored by most Hebrew scholars. The oldest Hebrew manuscripts present the name in the form of four consonants, commonly called the Tetragrammaton (from Greek te·tra-, meaning “four,” and gramʹma, “letter”). These four letters (written from right to left) are יהוה and may be transliterated into English as YHWH (or, JHVH).
The Hebrew consonants of the name are therefore known. The question is, Which vowels are to be combined with those consonants? Vowel points did not come into use in Hebrew until the second half of the first millennium C.E. (See HEBREW, II [Hebrew Alphabet and Script].) Furthermore, because of a religious superstition that had begun centuries earlier, the vowel pointing found in Hebrew manuscripts does not provide the key for determining which vowels should appear in the divine name.
Superstition hides the name. At some point a superstitious idea arose among the Jews that it was wrong even to pronounce the divine name (represented by the Tetragrammaton). Just what basis was originally assigned for discontinuing the use of the name is not definitely known. Some hold that the name was viewed as being too sacred for imperfect lips to speak. Yet the Hebrew Scriptures themselves give no evidence that any of God’s true servants ever felt any hesitancy about pronouncing his name. Non-Biblical Hebrew documents, such as the so-called Lachish Letters, show the name was used in regular correspondence in Palestine during the latter part of the seventh century B.C.E.
Another view is that the intent was to keep non-Jewish peoples from knowing the name and possibly misusing it. However, Jehovah himself said that he would ‘have his name declared in all the earth’ (Ex 9:16; compare 1Ch 16:23, 24; Ps 113:3; Mal 1:11, 14), to be known even by his adversaries. (Isa 64:2) The name was in fact known and used by pagan nations both in pre-Common Era times and in the early centuries of the Common Era. (The Jewish Encyclopedia, 1976, Vol. XII, p. 119) Another claim is that the purpose was to protect the name from use in magical rites. If so, this was poor reasoning, as it is obvious that the more mysterious the name became through disuse the more it would suit the purposes of practicers of magic.
When did the superstition take hold? Just as the reason or reasons originally advanced for discontinuing the use of the divine name are uncertain, so, too, there is much uncertainty as to when this superstitious view really took hold. Some claim that it began following the Babylonian exile (607-537 B.C.E.). This theory, however, is based on a supposed reduction in the use of the name by the later writers of the Hebrew Scriptures, a view that does not hold up under examination. Malachi, for example, was evidently one of the last books of the Hebrew Scriptures written (in the latter half of the fifth century B.C.E.), and it gives great prominence to the divine name.
Many reference works have suggested that the name ceased to be used by about 300 B.C.E. Evidence for this date supposedly was found in the absence of the Tetragrammaton (or a transliteration of it) in the Greek Septuagint translation of the Hebrew Scriptures, begun about 280 B.C.E. It is true that the most complete manuscript copies of the Septuagint now known do consistently follow the practice of substituting the Greek words Kyʹri·os (Lord) or The·osʹ (God) for the Tetragrammaton. But these major manuscripts date back only as far as the fourth and fifth centuries C.E. More ancient copies, though in fragmentary form, have been discovered that prove that the earliest copies of the Septuagint did contain the divine name.
One of these is the fragmentary remains of a papyrus roll of a portion of Deuteronomy, listed as P. Fouad Inventory No. 266. (PICTURE, Vol. 1, p. 326) It regularly presents the Tetragrammaton, written in square Hebrew characters, in each case of its appearance in the Hebrew text being translated. This papyrus is dated by scholars as being from the first century B.C.E., and thus it was written four or five centuries earlier than the manuscripts mentioned previously.—See NW appendix, pp. 1562-1564.
▼ Random101
Same as for YHWDH (of course without the D)
And she conceived again, and bare a son: and she said, Now will I praise YHWH: therefore she called his name YHWDH ; and left bearing. (Genesis 29:35)
▼ dreamdigital
If you were Hebrew you would say Yahweh (Yah-way). But since we are not Hebrew, in English they say Jehovah.
▼ Random101
Neither of those forms are consistent with the pronunciation of related Hebrew words. Confusion of language is the hallmark of Babylon.
▼ dreamdigital
The Hebrew language doesn't use vowels. So yes, it is consistent.
▼ Random101
While it's true that vowel points are a relatively recent innovation for written Hebrew, there's still vocalization between letters which approximates vowels. For example for @LYHW there is vocalization of HW, which is consistent with YHWDH, but not with your pronunciation of YHWH as Yahweh.
https://www.blueletterbible.org/lang/lexicon/lexicon.cfm?Strongs=H453&t=KJV
▼ GreenDell144
That's not the issue. Your using a rubric of phonetics and etymology to suggest that the name should not be used at all. I wonder if it is better to try to use it with respect than to forget it altogether. My wife calls me "punkin". If she erased my name from important documents and wrote 'punkin' everywhere, even though she loves me, I would still be quite annoyed.
▼ Random101
No, consistency in interpretation is has a solid foundation.
No, I'm not.
▼ GreenDell144
I think the point of using 'Jehovah' over 'Yahweh' is about name recognition. In literature and even in old US government documents (like early drafts of the constitution, if I remember correctly) Jehovah was used because that path of the word etymology gives us other named as well, like Jesus, Isaiah, Joshua, Jeremiah, etc. basically every bible name. If we change Jehovah to Yahweh, we should change those to. Personally, I find it easier to say 'Jesus' than 'Yeheshuah' or whatnot.
▼ Random101
Bablyon's gonna Babylon.
▼ dreamdigital
When did the Jews in general actually stop pronouncing the personal name of God?
So, at least in written form, there is no sound evidence of any disappearance or disuse of the divine name in the B.C.E. period. In the first century C.E., there first appears some evidence of a superstitious attitude toward the name. Josephus, a Jewish historian from a priestly family, when recounting God’s revelation to Moses at the site of the burning bush, says: “Then God revealed to him His name, which ere then had not come to men’s ears, and of which I am forbidden to speak.” (Jewish Antiquities, II, 276 [xii, 4]) Josephus’ statement, however, besides being inaccurate as to knowledge of the divine name prior to Moses, is vague and does not clearly reveal just what the general attitude current in the first century was as to pronouncing or using the divine name.
The Jewish Mishnah, a collection of rabbinic teachings and traditions, is somewhat more explicit. Its compilation is credited to a rabbi known as Judah the Prince, who lived in the second and third centuries C.E. Some of the Mishnaic material clearly relates to circumstances prior to the destruction of Jerusalem and its temple in 70 C.E. Of the Mishnah, however, one scholar says: “It is a matter of extreme difficulty to decide what historical value we should attach to any tradition recorded in the Mishnah. The lapse of time which may have served to obscure or distort memories of times so different; the political upheavals, changes, and confusions brought about by two rebellions and two Roman conquests; the standards esteemed by the Pharisean party (whose opinions the Mishnah records) which were not those of the Sadducean party . . .—these are factors which need to be given due weight in estimating the character of the Mishnah’s statements. Moreover there is much in the contents of the Mishnah that moves in an atmosphere of academic discussion pursued for its own sake, with (so it would appear) little pretence at recording historical usage.” (The Mishnah, translated by H. Danby, London, 1954, pp. xiv, xv) Some of the Mishnaic traditions concerning the pronouncing of the divine name are as follows:
In connection with the annual Day of Atonement, Danby’s translation of the Mishnah states: “And when the priests and the people which stood in the Temple Court heard the Expressed Name come forth from the mouth of the High Priest, they used to kneel and bow themselves and fall down on their faces and say, ‘Blessed be the name of the glory of his kingdom for ever and ever!’” (Yoma 6:2) Of the daily priestly blessings, Sotah 7:6 says: “In the Temple they pronounced the Name as it was written, but in the provinces by a substituted word.” Sanhedrin 7:5 states that a blasphemer was not guilty ‘unless he pronounced the Name,’ and that in a trial involving a charge of blasphemy a substitute name was used until all the evidence had been heard; then the chief witness was asked privately to ‘say expressly what he had heard,’ presumably employing the divine name. Sanhedrin 10:1, in listing those “that have no share in the world to come,” states: “Abba Saul says: Also he that pronounces the Name with its proper letters.” Yet, despite these negative views, one also finds in the first section of the Mishnah the positive injunction that “a man should salute his fellow with [the use of] the Name [of God],” the example of Boaz (Ru 2:4) then being cited.—Berakhot 9:5.
Taken for what they are worth, these traditional views may reveal a superstitious tendency to avoid using the divine name sometime before Jerusalem’s temple was destroyed in 70 C.E. Even then, it is primarily the priests who are explicitly said to have used a substitute name in place of the divine name, and that only in the provinces. Additionally the historical value of the Mishnaic traditions is questionable, as we have seen.
There is, therefore, no genuine basis for assigning any time earlier than the first and second centuries C.E. for the development of the superstitious view calling for discontinuance of the use of the divine name. The time did come, however, when in reading the Hebrew Scriptures in the original language, the Jewish reader substituted either ʼAdho·naiʹ (Sovereign Lord) or ʼElo·himʹ (God) rather than pronounce the divine name represented by the Tetragrammaton. This is seen from the fact that when vowel pointing came into use in the second half of the first millennium C.E., the Jewish copyists inserted the vowel points for either ʼAdho·naiʹ or ʼElo·himʹ into the Tetragrammaton, evidently to warn the reader to say those words in place of pronouncing the divine name. If using the Greek Septuagint translation of the Hebrew Scriptures in later copies, the reader, of course, found the Tetragrammaton completely replaced by Kyʹri·os and The·osʹ.—See LORD.
Translations into other languages, such as the Latin Vulgate, followed the example of these later copies of the Greek Septuagint. The Catholic Douay Version (of 1609-1610) in English, based on the Latin Vulgate, therefore does not contain the divine name, while the King James Version (1611) uses LORD or GOD (in capital and small capitals) to represent the Tetragrammaton in the Hebrew Scriptures, except in four cases.
▼ GreenDell144
You should be commended for your effort! Wow.
▼ dreamdigital
What is the proper pronunciation of God’s name?
In the second half of the first millennium C.E., Jewish scholars introduced a system of points to represent the missing vowels in the consonantal Hebrew text. When it came to God’s name, instead of inserting the proper vowel signs for it, they put other vowel signs to remind the reader that he should say ʼAdho·naiʹ (meaning “Sovereign Lord”) or ʼElo·himʹ (meaning “God”).
The Codex Leningrad B 19A, of the 11th century C.E., vowel points the Tetragrammaton to read Yehwahʹ, Yehwihʹ, and Yeho·wahʹ. Ginsburg’s edition of the Masoretic text vowel points the divine name to read Yeho·wahʹ. (Ge 3:14, ftn) Hebrew scholars generally favor “Yahweh” as the most likely pronunciation. They point out that the abbreviated form of the name is Yah (Jah in the Latinized form), as at Psalm 89:8 and in the expression Ha·lelu-Yahʹ (meaning “Praise Jah, you people!”). (Ps 104:35; 150:1, 6) Also, the forms Yehohʹ, Yoh, Yah, and Yaʹhu, found in the Hebrew spelling of the names Jehoshaphat, Joshaphat, Shephatiah, and others, can all be derived from Yahweh. Greek transliterations of the name by early Christian writers point in a somewhat similar direction with spellings such as I·a·beʹ and I·a·ou·eʹ, which, as pronounced in Greek, resemble Yahweh. Still, there is by no means unanimity among scholars on the subject, some favoring yet other pronunciations, such as “Yahuwa,” “Yahuah,” or “Yehuah.”
Since certainty of pronunciation is not now attainable, there seems to be no reason for abandoning in English the well-known form “Jehovah” in favor of some other suggested pronunciation. If such a change were made, then, to be consistent, changes should be made in the spelling and pronunciation of a host of other names found in the Scriptures: Jeremiah would be changed to Yir·meyahʹ, Isaiah would become Yeshaʽ·yaʹhu, and Jesus would be either Yehoh·shuʹaʽ (as in Hebrew) or I·e·sousʹ (as in Greek). The purpose of words is to transmit thoughts; in English the name Jehovah identifies the true God, transmitting this thought more satisfactorily today than any of the suggested substitutes.
Importance of the Name. Many modern scholars and Bible translators advocate following the tradition of eliminating the distinctive name of God. They not only claim that its uncertain pronunciation justifies such a course but also hold that the supremacy and uniqueness of the true God make unnecessary his having a particular name. Such a view receives no support from the inspired Scriptures, either those of pre-Christian times or those of the Christian Greek Scriptures.
The Tetragrammaton occurs 6,828 times in the Hebrew text printed in Biblia Hebraica and Biblia Hebraica Stuttgartensia. In the Hebrew Scriptures the New World Translation contains the divine name 6,973 times, because the translators took into account, among other things, the fact that in some places the scribes had replaced the divine name with ʼAdho·naiʹ or ʼElo·himʹ. (See NW appendix, pp. 1561, 1562.) The very frequency of the appearance of the name attests to its importance to the Bible’s Author, whose name it is. Its use throughout the Scriptures far outnumbers that of any of the titles, such as “Sovereign Lord” or “God,” applied to him.
Noteworthy, also, is the importance given to names themselves in the Hebrew Scriptures and among Semitic peoples. Professor G. T. Manley points out: “A study of the word ‘name’ in the O[ld] T[estament] reveals how much it means in Hebrew. The name is no mere label, but is significant of the real personality of him to whom it belongs. . . . When a person puts his ‘name’ upon a thing or another person the latter comes under his influence and protection.”—New Bible Dictionary, edited by J. D. Douglas, 1985, p. 430; compare Everyman’s Talmud, by A. Cohen, 1949, p. 24; Ge 27:36; 1Sa 25:25; Ps 20:1; Pr 22:1; see NAME.
“God” and “Father” not distinctive. The title “God” is neither personal nor distinctive (one can even make a god of his belly; Php 3:19). In the Hebrew Scriptures the same word (ʼElo·himʹ) is applied to Jehovah, the true God, and also to false gods, such as the Philistine god Dagon (Jg 16:23, 24; 1Sa 5:7) and the Assyrian god Nisroch. (2Ki 19:37) For a Hebrew to tell a Philistine or an Assyrian that he worshiped “God [ʼElo·himʹ]” would obviously not have sufficed to identify the Person to whom his worship went.
In its articles on Jehovah, The Imperial Bible-Dictionary nicely illustrates the difference between ʼElo·himʹ (God) and Jehovah. Of the name Jehovah, it says: “It is everywhere a proper name, denoting the personal God and him only; whereas Elohim partakes more of the character of a common noun, denoting usually, indeed, but not necessarily nor uniformly, the Supreme. . . . The Hebrew may say the Elohim, the true God, in opposition to all false gods; but he never says the Jehovah, for Jehovah is the name of the true God only. He says again and again my God . . . ; but never my Jehovah, for when he says my God, he means Jehovah. He speaks of the God of Israel, but never of the Jehovah of Israel, for there is no other Jehovah. He speaks of the living God, but never of the living Jehovah, for he cannot conceive of Jehovah as other than living.”—Edited by P. Fairbairn, London, 1874, Vol. I, p. 856.
The same is true of the Greek term for God, The·osʹ. It was applied alike to the true God and to such pagan gods as Zeus and Hermes (Roman Jupiter and Mercury). (Compare Ac 14:11-15.) Presenting the true situation are Paul’s words at 1 Corinthians 8:4-6: “For even though there are those who are called ‘gods,’ whether in heaven or on earth, just as there are many ‘gods’ and many ‘lords,’ there is actually to us one God the Father, out of whom all things are, and we for him.” The belief in numerous gods, which makes essential that the true God be distinguished from such, has continued even into this 21st century.
Paul’s reference to “God the Father” does not mean that the true God’s name is “Father,” for the designation “father” applies as well to every human male parent and describes men in other relationships. (Ro 4:11, 16; 1Co 4:15) The Messiah is given the title “Eternal Father.” (Isa 9:6) Jesus called Satan the “father” of certain murderous opposers. (Joh 8:44) The term was also applied to gods of the nations, the Greek god Zeus being represented as the great father god in Homeric poetry. That “God the Father” has a name, one that is distinct from his Son’s name, is shown in numerous texts. (Mt 28:19; Re 3:12; 14:1) Paul knew the personal name of God, Jehovah, as found in the creation account in Genesis, from which Paul quoted in his writings. That name, Jehovah, distinguishes “God the Father” (compare Isa 64:8), thereby blocking any attempt at merging or blending his identity and person with that of any other to whom the title “god” or “father” may be applied.
▼ stric9
For me, the truth is so disturbing and makes me rage. To the point that i want to start hunting people without mercy. It's not even a point of consideration in my book. I wouldn't be much help because that would be stooping to their level. Maybe i can find other ways.
▼ GhostOfSwartz
Thanks for this. I've been studying the Bible this week in relation to PG.
▼ GreenDell144
Dont stop. Do it prayerfully. You will have a good result.
▼ DoJustice
Very welcome :)
▼ dipedo57
Those of us who have open minds are already aware . Please don't lump Christians together .. There are many different kinds of Christians , the only thing we have in common is a love of Christ . I think you would be amazed at how many followers of Christ believe this is biblical . I personally believe God is tired of the evil . Jesus told us hurting children was an affront to God and everything these monsters do is to offend him. . John calls himself Catholic and is doing everything he can to destroy our church . It would be hard to ignore this if you have an IQ over 100 .
▼ Kacey
If God was tired of the evil and if he is ALL powerful he would end the evil. If he can make a heaven where there is no evil and that is good, then he can do the same on earth. If he is the creator of everything then he created evil. And over and over in the Bible he approves of what we would deem evil as per the verse below
Most Christians don't read the whole Bible.
▼ GreenDell144
One translation says "take them into your household" another says "as your children" another "as your slaves". I trust that He included that in the scriptures for a reason. Likely that society was corrupt to an unfathomable degree. Archaeological evidence of massive pits filled with sacrificed children and women and pagan religious paraphernalia are common finds in those lands. Evil was constantly at the border and moving into their communities. The original inhabitants of the land must have bern terrible. If you continue to read, you will see laws that protect orphans, widows and foreign residents. That doesn't stack up with the picture of a nation of murderous child plunderers, does it?
▼ GreenDell144
I think He hates these things even mor deeply than we do. Here is my take on why he allows it: 1. It cant go on forever. It is a cancerous blight of depravity that requires an unsustainable society to allow evil on that level. It will end and if humans are to survive, they will need a new model for society. God is ready with that, his kingdom through Jesus. Jesus didn't mistreat anyone, and he demonstrated mastery over every institution and system, including the weather. 2: God has the power to restore and resurrect all that have fallen as victims to the satanic experiment. He has shown that this His intention. It is a core teaching, not 'immortal soul' or Hell/Purgatory stuff. 3: Because of the evil around us, every day MANY people are searching for and FINDING him. When this number goes to zero, I believe we will see something we have never seen before.
▼ dipedo57
I don't read the bible and take everything literally . I think the old testament is more of a history book since everything before Jesus was changed with his arrival . What I believe is that Christ loves us all and in return we love everyone . The exception being of course people that hurt others . I don't really care too much about the details I just know when I do good I feel good . I guess I'm more of the hippy-dippy Christian. I love God with my whole heart therefore I love people [not evil ones ] with an open heart.
▼ Hagen18
What exactly is the problem here? The Canaanites, whom the Israelites were given licence to exterminate, were a wicked people who practiced things like child sacrifice etc. What is evil about destroying such people? The men were to be killed, the children and women kept alive as slaves. Besides God has a right to do what he wants with his own creations. Fortunately he is supremely just so he only allows the destruction of the evil, which the Canaanites were. Furthermore, he wanted to place the Israelites with whom he made a covenant, in a new land of their own. The Canaanites were ripe for extermination and so they might as well make room for God's chosen.
So what is evil here, pray tell?
Furthermore, the only way you could say that God allows evil is to say that it was evil for him to create humanity, but I would assume that you like most people are happy to be alive, no? God gave humans free will. If he had not done so, humans would be like robots and not living beings at all. Now it's a human's own decision to do evil. God never taught them to do evil and indeed he punishes each human for their evil deeds. Humans have the possibility to do wonderful and beautiful things, but many use their cognitive abilities to do evil. The only way to rid the world of human evil is to wipe humans out completely, which God nearly did thousands of years ago. But then many would call God evil for doing so. Heathens will forever rage against the Lord and whatever he does in his perfect rectitude, there will always be complaining and ingratitude.
▼ Kacey
Hmmm so the children are to be taken as plunder and used as plunder. Somehow I thought people on this site were concerned about children and their welfare. Are children considered to be guilty if their parents are guilty? Are they to be enslaved for the sins of their parents?
Perhaps you don't understand what plunder is. When one country defeats another country they feel they have a right to take anything that belonged to those people and to make those people slaves. Plundering is what pirates did, what the Vikings did, etc. It is not considered a noble thing to do. Pillage is a synonym for plunder
As for free will, for free will is what makes evil possible. Children are raped, tortured and killed by people exercising free will. I would be glad for humans to have no free will to stop all the evil. So I would then be a robot, so what. Is my having free will more important than kids being raped. BTW humans seem to have no problem removing people's free will once they have abused it. That is why we have jails. Could God not remove at least those who abuse kids from the mix while letting the rest of us muck around with free will concerning telling lies or stealing pens from work. Humans understand that some crimes need to be stopped by removing the free will of the worst criminals. God if all powerful could do that too. Let us play out our free will on lesser crimes and not let kids have their minds and hearts scarred because of the free will of others.
Parents regularly restrict the free will of their kids. Good parents do not allow one child to beat up another child. They do not let infants use knives or give the keys to the car to 10 year olds. Yet God stands back and watches this horror on planet earth and claims to be a good loving parent.
▼ Hagen18
Yes, the Israelites destroyed and plundered their way through Canaan. Too bad they didn't do more of it, but they were too weak to follow God's clear and severe commandments. The men were killed and the women and children kept alive. You might have a distorted view of what slavery usually meant throughout the millennia, but it was often not that bad at all. It varied a lot. For example, you and I are slaves. Yes, we are slaves of our governments and the power brokers of this world. You may not know it or feel it, but trust me, you are. The biggest problem is that most people actually think they are free and not slaves. Not good. At least past slaves knew what they were. Now, being a slave itself is not necessarily even that bad if you have a benevolent master. Our masters today are not benevolent, but psychopathic scumbags. Fortunately for the vanquished Canaanites, the Israelites were generally, I am sure, benevolent and good masters. After all the Israelites were in covenant with the supremely just God of this world, and so the vanquished Canaanites too partook of the blessings of the Father.
I don't think plundering and violence is generally good, of course not, in fact it's evil when perpetrated against the innocent. But when the creator of this world commands you to do so at the expense of a sinful people, who am I to protest? Now you probably don't believe in my God so you couldn't care less, but to me he is very real and his word is the law.
So you would rather be a robot then? Then there is no you, you never existed, nor did any other human. If you were not a human you could've never had this conversation or lament the fact that there is evil in the world (due to the sinful nature of humanity). Weird of you to think this way, but to each his own. At any rate, that is not how things are and we humans do exist as cognitive beings. You can't do anything to change that. That being the case, we should do our best to behave and use our existence to further good things. You are right when you say that good humans should stop bad humans! Exactly! That is our job. We should prove ourselves worthy of being God's singularly unique creations by fighting against evil. It's not God's job to go around fixing things that humans should be able to fix.
However, there have been times when God has very directly affected things. He wiped out most of humanity already thousands of years ago (you almost got your wish, heh!). Then, since humans remained exceedingly sinful even after this, he made a covenant with the Israelites. They too mostly degenerated over time and then came Christ to share the gospel with the world. No one can anymore claim that they don't have the key to living a good and moral life, or that they can not escape the evil of this mortal world by going to heaven through their trust in Christ. But anyway, don't worry, I don't think the evil in this world will be going on for much longer. The wicked are picking up the pace. The Bible tells us that a time will come when humanity will become so weak and degenerate that God will put a final end to it. That is when the wicked will be destroyed and the good will ascend to heaven. As you can see, God is no passive party in all this. Once humanity has filled the cup of its iniquity to the brim, that is when God intervenes one last time.
▼ 70times7
The catholic church has since its inception been one thing and one thing only.
Antichrist.
Sits on 7 hills? Check. Changed Gods times and laws? Check. Killed Christians for 1260 years(42 prophetic months)? Check. Leaders who claim to be God on earth? Check. Forbidding priests to marry? Check.
And the other 30 prophecies the Mother of Harlots fulfills.
http://www.remnantofgod.org/666-CHAR.htm
▼ dipedo57
One thing I don't do is judge other Christians Jesus told me not to . The Catholic church has been a target for the antichrist but since it was the first organized Christian church it was started with Christ as it's leader . Politics have tried to turn our church into something else but the majority of us are out trying to help people but we are not going to get credit for the good things we do only what evil people are doing to destroy us from the inside out . I think you are very well meaning but since my IQ is 145 your calling me stupid is kind of funny .
▼ 70times7
Jesus nor the apostles started the catholic church.
Use some of that monster iq and do some reading.
Your trinity god is an abomination. Your sunday instead of the sabbath is an abomination. Your holidays are an abomination. Your theology is based on paganism. Your own leaders admit it...
The use of temples, and these dedicated to particular saints, and ornamented on occasions with branches of trees; incense, lamps, and candles; votive offerings on recovery from illness; holy water; asylums; holydays and seasons, use of calendars, processions, blessings on the fields; sacerdotal vestments, the tonsure, the ring in marriage, turning to the East, images at a later date, perhaps the ecclesiastical chant, and the Kyrie Eleison, are all of pagan origin , and sanctified by their adoption into the Church." -Cardinal Newman
Antichrist.
▼ GreenDell144
I have never understood why so many continue on in their participation. When I first learned these things, I had to start over. The Bible is real... It can lead people to the truth.
▼ dipedo57
God bless and keep you
▼ dreamdigital
You forgot that they removed God's name from the bible.
▼ GreenDell144
Not successfully, nor completely. They forgot Psalm 83:18, yo!
▼ dreamdigital
Psalms 83:18 is the number 1 verse to show people God's name. It goes without saying.
▼ Oh_Well_ian
Interesting you say that, because I have felt the majority of pushback comes from Christians who I have attempted to enlighten.
▼ dipedo57
It was a good post I just wanted you to understand we aren't all alike . I feel like a lot of Christians are so terrified of what's going on they refuse to see it. I personally am not afraid because of my religion. I wish I could make people see what you posted but its hard when people stick their head in the sand
▼ Psalm144-1
They are not real Christians then...
▼ 2impendingdoom
It only because they are not evil. its too hard for a normal person to believe in the extent of all the depravity, try sticking to the financial aspects of stuff.
When things like crazy high art prices for a crappy art piece gets mentioned I'll causally say "oh isn't that how they launder money as a cover for human trafficking?" and they are like "oh. well, huh." Or I'll say when there is an opioid death on the news, "there is huge money in organ trafficking." seeds planted.
▼ pizzaequalspedo
I think the majority of Christian do not believe Satan exists.
I think it would be very hard to think this is even possible without understanding that spiritual wickedness exists.
▼ Piscina
I think it's really interesting no look at interpretations of Revelations, because that too has references to what is happening now with pizzagate.
▼ DoJustice
It does. This one is especially quite amazing to me considering how rampant human, organ and sex trafficking is all around the world right now: " ... the merchants of the earth will weep and mourn over her, for no one buys their merchandise anymore: merchandise of gold and silver, precious stones and pearls, fine linen and purple, silk and scarlet, every kind of citron wood, every kind of object of ivory, every kind of object of most precious wood, bronze, iron, and marble; and cinnamon and incense, fragrant oil and frankincense, wine and oil, fine flour and wheat, cattle and sheep, horses and chariots, and bodies and souls of men ." Revelation 18:11-13