the war in ukraine has now escalated.
europe is now talking of getting involved in the war to curb the north korean armies that are helping russia.
putin has warned that this will now give him no choice but to retaliate against nato nations.. the biden administration and the democrats in congress want to make sure that the war escalates to such a point that trump won't be able to bring peace to the war in ukraine.
Let me guess, Russia isn't dumping missiles and bombs on Ukrainians cities.
They are and have the right to.
Robert F. Kennedy Jr. Explains How The Ukraine Russia War Started - YouTubeit's about Biden escalating the war into WW3
Exactly and if that happens before Jan 20th Trump will not take office...
hello!i am an independent scholar and researcher with a deep curiosity for ancient cultures and texts.
i do not adhere to any religious tradition, but my passion for understanding the mysteries of our past has led me to explore biblical stories in depth.
my particular interest lies in the original hebrew text of the bible, which i find fascinating both as literature and as a source of historical riddles.i recently completed a study that might change the way you perceive some well-known biblical stories.
The same goes for "Joshua." The name in Hebrew actually sounds something like "YehoeShooWah"
This is what I was asking of you when I said:
Can you tell me how you would spell the following in English:
יְהוֹשֻׁעַ
If you knew that "YehoeShooWah" better represented יְהוֹשֻׁעַ , then why did you say 'Joshua' instead of Yehoshua or Jehoshua? (3091.Yehoshua)
'Yud Hey Vav Shin Ayin' is in the full name יְהוֹשֻׁעַ , with Yud Hey Vav (Yeho) representing the first part of יְהוֹשֻׁעַ , and 'Shin Ahin' (shua) representing the second part of יְהוֹשֻׁעַ. Is that right?
But when you write Joshua/Yoshua/Yeshua/Jeshsa it is a shorten form of Yehoshua/Jehoshua. Is that right?
In the shorten form, all of 'Yud Hey Vav Shin Ayin' is not found in there, either the Hey or Vav part would be missing from the shorten version.
So, if I asked how to spell יְוֹשֻׁע or יהשֻׁעַ (with either the Hey or Vav missing from the first part of 'Yud Hey Vav') then you could use the shorten version but if ask how you would spell יְהוֹשֻׁעַ , which includes all of 'Yud Hey Vav' in the first part, then you would need to say Yehoshua/Jehoshua.
To reply with the spelling of the shorten version, when you know you are reading in Hebrew the full version, would not be accurate.
This is my reasoning. I do not read or write Hebrew, so I have always wanted to ask someone who claims to.
Is there anything I said that you disagree with or that I am wrong about there?
Also, I would like to ask about what happens to the V (Vav) when writing Yehoshua ('Yud Hey Vav'- יְהוֹשֻׁעַ). Why isn't it Yehovshua?
the war in ukraine has now escalated.
europe is now talking of getting involved in the war to curb the north korean armies that are helping russia.
putin has warned that this will now give him no choice but to retaliate against nato nations.. the biden administration and the democrats in congress want to make sure that the war escalates to such a point that trump won't be able to bring peace to the war in ukraine.
The Biden administration and the Democrats in Congress want to make sure that the war escalates to such a point that Trump won't be able to bring peace to the war in Ukraine.
Or to the point Trump will never take office.
hello!i am an independent scholar and researcher with a deep curiosity for ancient cultures and texts.
i do not adhere to any religious tradition, but my passion for understanding the mysteries of our past has led me to explore biblical stories in depth.
my particular interest lies in the original hebrew text of the bible, which i find fascinating both as literature and as a source of historical riddles.i recently completed a study that might change the way you perceive some well-known biblical stories.
This is "Joshua."
The letters are Yohd Hey Vav Shin Ayin.
Thanks.
If those are the letters, are they all found within the name (Joshua) you chose to use based on the Hebrew (יְהוֹשֻׁעַ) name?
hello!i am an independent scholar and researcher with a deep curiosity for ancient cultures and texts.
i do not adhere to any religious tradition, but my passion for understanding the mysteries of our past has led me to explore biblical stories in depth.
my particular interest lies in the original hebrew text of the bible, which i find fascinating both as literature and as a source of historical riddles.i recently completed a study that might change the way you perceive some well-known biblical stories.
I was raised a Jew and went to Hebrew school for 10 years.
Can you tell me how you would spell the following in English:
when i was in the org it seemed most brothers were very much into football and other sports.
which looking back makes no sense and makes me wonder why?
it felt like an overcompensating to be masculine.. shouldn't football be deemed unchristian?
in an earlier thread another poster asserted that there is no evidence that revelation 3:14 played a part in the 4th controversy that led to the trinity doctrine.
this was claimed as evidence that the description of jesus as “the beginning of the creation of god” in the verse was not understood to mean that jesus was god’s first creation.
the scholarly greek–english lexicon of the new testament & other early christian literature 3e (2001) by bauer, arndt, gingrich, and danker, in its latest edition states that “first creation” is indeed the probable meaning of the greek phrase.
the last post you linked to the MEV version of the Bible (a retranslation of the KJV that attempts to be inclusive for modern Christian thoughts) and stated that you could not be rebutted because you only made claims from scripture as if what you had quoted up to that point could not be rebutted
LOL! Take a breath.
Whatever version I used I just picked randomly. He linked a site, and I picked one on there. (I believe more than one I used.) I have no preference. You seem to! What do you prefer?
And the initial claims can be rebutted as he did. And because of doing so is why I set out to explain/support what I claimed.
Here is his rebutted to my initial claim which is fine at that point:
Equating the MOL with the 8th king and other apocalyptic figures (e.g., King of the North, small horn) is speculative and unsupported by Scripture. Paul’s reference to the MOL in 2 Thessalonians 2 speaks to a spiritual rebellion, which Catholic teaching sees as applicable across history, not confined to one individual or regime. Your claim that the MOL sits in God’s temple (2 Thessalonians 2:4) being the same as the 8th king in Revelation 17 misreads both texts. The "temple" in Paul’s writing likely refers to the Church or God's spiritual dwelling, not a literal structure tied to a specific political entity.
Here is my replay:
In regard to the 8th king/MOL/KOTN/DT etc., before I say more, answer these questions first and mull for a bit on those following Scriptures.
But then his response right after (you can go read it here) caused for me to have to say:
Regardless, you could not even do what was asked and that was to first tell me the when and how those 4 come to their end.
And in regard to the Scriptures, I asked you just to mull over them for a bit before I say more, meaning don't reply about them yet,
And on and on it went.
So, what I said that you are referring to is, that he cannot rebut my argument/explanation, because I never even got the chance to give it.
Yet he says:
3. Rebuttal of Your Arguments
He is still trying to rebut my initial claims and Scriptures that I CLEARLY told him to read now, don't reply back yet about them, I will say more later.
Anyway, I am done speaking about it.
The problem is that he is a Catholic here trying to promote their teachings. That is as bad as a JW here trying to promote their teachings.
It is different than others here that are ex-JWs that still believe the Bible and try to talk about things to a degree of trying to understand things, while not promoting any particular religion. If anything, the WTS by all its BS, has shown to need to get away from ALL religions, including it.
That said about trying to understand that Bible, I also can see and appreciate comments like this:
nicolaou
You guys will strain out the Watchtowers gnats but swallow the Bible's camels.
in an earlier thread another poster asserted that there is no evidence that revelation 3:14 played a part in the 4th controversy that led to the trinity doctrine.
this was claimed as evidence that the description of jesus as “the beginning of the creation of god” in the verse was not understood to mean that jesus was god’s first creation.
the scholarly greek–english lexicon of the new testament & other early christian literature 3e (2001) by bauer, arndt, gingrich, and danker, in its latest edition states that “first creation” is indeed the probable meaning of the greek phrase.
When they stop linking to WOL as their proof, then you can engage in discussion.
LOL!
Look back here (last post) and check the hyperlinks to what was used. This is because I can use ANY to prove what I am saying. And there is no engaging in discussion with him. He responds one sided (his side). He lacks the ability to respond to what is asked. And does not understand what he reads.
For example:
When you state, for example, that the Man of Lawlessness (MOL) is the same as the 8th King, the King of the North, or the Small Horn, you are making an interpretive leap that demands evidence. Citing passages that describe these figures without demonstrating their interconnectedness is insufficient.
Second, your approach to symbolic versus literal interpretation lacks clarity and consistency. You accuse me of not understanding your intended point about symbolic and literal timeframes, but you have provided no explanation to reconcile your interpretive method.
Third, your reliance on isolated proof texts creates a fragmented interpretation. By citing a series of unrelated verses about “time” and “judgment,” you attempt to draw conclusions about the timing and nature of prophetic events.
He responds with that even though I told him that I was going to cite Scriptures first for him to review/think about. And I was going to also ask a few questions first to get those answers. (I need those as my foundation for timing.) Then I would explain why I connect those Scriptures to support the claims I do.
Him being told that, and yet he still responds as he did above.
Does that sound like someone that can comprehend...
in an earlier thread another poster asserted that there is no evidence that revelation 3:14 played a part in the 4th controversy that led to the trinity doctrine.
this was claimed as evidence that the description of jesus as “the beginning of the creation of god” in the verse was not understood to mean that jesus was god’s first creation.
the scholarly greek–english lexicon of the new testament & other early christian literature 3e (2001) by bauer, arndt, gingrich, and danker, in its latest edition states that “first creation” is indeed the probable meaning of the greek phrase.
First to everything you said/say and how you respond...
3. Rebuttal of Your Arguments
I don't know how you can rebut me at this point because I haven't made my arguments. I have only made claims of who I say entities are and cited Scriptures that I will use to support my claims. Your response never allows to move forward. But at this point I will not be bothering to make such arguments to you as you are too foolish to keep responding to. Proverbs 26:4
That's All I Have To Say About That- Forrest Gump Quote
And as far as times being symbolic or literal and Jesus' ministry you have no clue, nor do you know what I was going to say about it.
[6 While we were yet helpless, at the right time Christ died for the ungodly.]
[ 29 Suddenly they shouted, “What have you to do with us, Son of God? Have you come here to torment us before the time?”]
[21 As I looked, this horn made war with the saints, and prevailed over them, 22 until the Ancient of Days came, and judgment was given for the saints of the Most High, and the time came when the saints received the kingdom.]
[3 Blessed is the one who reads the words of the prophecy, and blessed are those who hear and who keep what is written in it, for the time is near.]
[ 19 He said, “Listen, and I will tell you what will take place later in the period of wrath, for it refers to the appointed time of the end.]
[17 For the time has come for judgment to begin with the household of God; and if it begins with us, what will be the end of those who do not obey the gospel of God?]
[7 and he said with a loud voice, “Fear God and give him glory, for the hour of his judgment has come; and worship him who made heaven and earth, the sea and the fountains of water.”]
[12 “The ten horns which you saw are ten kings who have received no kingdom yet, but they will receive authority as kings for one hour with the beast.]
[ 6 One said to the man clothed in linen, who was above the water of the river, “How long shall it be to the end of these wonders?” 7 And I heard the man clothed in linen, who was over the water of the river, when he held up his right hand and his left hand to heaven, and swore by Him who lives forever that it would be for a time, times, and half a time. [a] And when they finish shattering the power of the holy people, all these things shall be finished.]
[3 And I will give power to my two witnesses, and they will prophesy for one thousand two hundred and sixty days, clothed in sackcloth.” 7 When they have finished their testimony, the beast that ascends from the bottomless pit will wage war against them and overcome them and kill them.]
[ 5 A mouth was given to him speaking arrogant words and blasphemies, and authority to act for forty-two months was given to him. 7 It was also given to him to make war with the [d]saints and to overcome them, and authority was given to him over every tribe, people, language, and nation.]
[33 “The wise among the people shall instruct many. Yet for many days they shall fall by the sword and by flame, by captivity and by destruction.]
[12 Blessed is he who waits and comes to the one thousand three hundred and thirty-five days.]
in an earlier thread another poster asserted that there is no evidence that revelation 3:14 played a part in the 4th controversy that led to the trinity doctrine.
this was claimed as evidence that the description of jesus as “the beginning of the creation of god” in the verse was not understood to mean that jesus was god’s first creation.
the scholarly greek–english lexicon of the new testament & other early christian literature 3e (2001) by bauer, arndt, gingrich, and danker, in its latest edition states that “first creation” is indeed the probable meaning of the greek phrase.
ALL that you said and still no answers. There you go again continuing to try to say what these things are and are not, when you have already done so.
It was you that said:
Equating the MOL with the 8th king and other apocalyptic figures (e.g., King of the North, small horn) is speculative and unsupported by Scripture.
So, now I am responding to show the Scriptural support. But you do not allow for that because instead of just answering and waiting for what I have to say about the Scriptures I cited, you keep responding with the same nonsense you have already said, to which is what I was already in the process of responding to.
If you think you answered what I asked, then can you copy and paste just the precise part in your reply that says when and how do each come to their end.
[MOL - 8 Then, indeed, the lawless one will be revealed, whom the Lord Jesus will do away with by the spirit of his mouth and bring to nothing by the manifestation of his presence.]
[KOTN - 45 And he will plant his royal tents between the grand sea and the holy mountain of Decoration; and he will come all the way to his end, and there will be no helper for him.]
[ Rev 17 8th king- 11 And the wild beast that was but is not, it is also an eighth king, but it springs from the seven, and it goes off into destruction.12 “The ten horns that you saw mean ten kings who have not yet received a kingdom, but they do receive authority as kings for one hour with the wild beast. 13 These have one thought, so they give their power and authority to the wild beast. 14 These will battle with the Lamb, but because he is Lord of lords and King of kings, the Lamb will conquer them. Also, those with him who are called and chosen and faithful will do so.”]
[Rev 13 beast - 19 And I saw the wild beast and the kings of the earth and their armies gathered together to wage war against the one seated on the horse and against his army. 20 And the wild beast was caught, and along with it the false prophet that performed in front of it the signs with which he misled those who received the mark of the wild beast and those who worship its image. While still alive, they both were hurled into the fiery lake that burns with sulfur.]
______________
Also, you never answered this:
How long from Jesus being baptized and starting his ministry to him returning to heaven?
