These is no other way without hearing you and you hearing me.
LOL! I'm sure that's the reason...
No more on this subject.
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.
These is no other way without hearing you and you hearing me.
LOL! I'm sure that's the reason...
No more on this subject.
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.
It's probably because you keep using the word "English." You keep asking me how to say it in "English."
To me this is Hebrew יְהוֹשֻׁעַ.
I can't read or pronounce that.
To me this is English 3091. Yehoshua.
I can read and pronounce that.
For you as someone who reads and speaks Hebrew and English, what do you say Yehoshua is to יְהוֹשֻׁעַ ?
Is it the English equivalent? (I am not concern about Roman letters (J) or not.)
I don't understand your obsession with just these two words.
Why do you have to jump to that? You said you were raised a Jew and took Hebrew 10 years.
What is so problematic about me asking about how to say יְהוֹשֻׁעַ correctly in English?
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...