Yeshua Says:

[daqq]

Numbers 21:5-9
5 And the people spoke against Elohim, and against Moshe, Wherefore have you brought us up out of Egypt to die in the wilderness? for there is no bread, and there is no water: and our soul loathes this light bread.
6 And YHWH sent among the people ha-Nchashim ha-Seraphim, and they struck the people; and much people of Yisrael died.
7 And the people came to Moshe, and said, We have sinned, because we have spoken against YHWH, and against you; intercede unto YHWH, that He take away ha-nachash [the serpent] from us: and Moshe interceded for the people.
8 And YHWH said to Moshe, Make you a Saraph and set it up on a sail-pole: [mast] and it shall come to pass that every one that is struck, when he sees it, shall live.
9 And Moshe made a nachash-serpent of brass and set it up on the sail-pole: and so it was that if a nachash-serpent had struck anyone, when he looked unto the nachash-serpent of brass, he lived.

For all the Prophets and the Torah prophesied until Yohanan, (Matthew 11:13).

 

[daqq]

Also, the first rank of initiates of Mithraism (which has many parallels to early Christianity) was the Corax (raven). Have you looked at Mithraism at all?

I had not looked much into Mithraism until now that you mentioned it; but now, having taken a cursory look, I do not see much by way of the more recent Roman version, (Wiki). If there is any initial connecting factor, from what I have seen so far, it would be through the meaning of the name Mithra, (Persian), which apparently means "friend" or "associate", (by way of a contract or covenant). That is the meaning also of Reuel, (ru`w, rea`, brother, companion, fellow, friend, neighbor, etc.), and thus Raguel, as you probably already know. However the symbolism is not the same because this kind of associate-friend is one like unto your own soul; more like a spirit twin brother, that is, an "El with us", (and why I find a link between Raguel and Emmanuel). Imo it is not about a "God", (to be worshiped), but rather more like food of angels, that is, spiritual food to be eaten: for the Elohim seed, (cf. Malachi 2:15), comes by way of consumption of the Seed of the Word, (Parable of the Sower and several other idiomatic statements and allegories). So you consume the Seed of the Word, like Maryah, and it comes to pass that a man-child is born, (ZKRY), and a son is given, (NPHG-Sprout), two sons ha-Yitzhar, (the fresh oil for the Light), that is, Emmanu'El, El with us. The one is your inner man and the other his brother does not seek his own glory but rather seeks to lead us like an Elder brother into true worship of the Father in the supernal and spiritual way that the Father desires.

 

[Wick Stick]

I had not looked much into Mithraism until now that you mentioned it; but now, having taken a cursory look, I do not see much by way of the more recent Roman version

I was primarily referring to the "burial in the sky" and its connection to the communal meal.

Mithraism, like Christianity, celebrated a communal meal which at first blush appears to be faux-cannibalism. (At second blush, both act out something different.)

But other parallels include a central place for a metaphorical marriage ceremony, baptismal rites using the four elements, and the use of anointing oil. Justin Martyr and Tertullian both wrote some on the parallels between the two (and of course to denounce the Mithraic cult.)

 

[daqq]

I was primarily referring to the "burial in the sky" and its connection to the communal meal.

Mithraism, like Christianity, celebrated a communal meal which at first blush appears to be faux-cannibalism. (At second blush, both act out something different.)

But other parallels include a central place for a metaphorical marriage ceremony, baptismal rites using the four elements, and the use of anointing oil. Justin Martyr and Tertullian both wrote some on the parallels between the two (and of course to denounce the Mithraic cult.)

Ah, I see, and yes that theme is likewise found in Psalm 22 which Yeshua points to at Golgotha:

Psalm 22:22-26
22 I will declare Thy Name unto my brethren: in the midst of the congregation will I praise Thee.
23 You that reverence YHWH, praise Him; all you of the seed of Yaakob, glorify Him; and reverence Him all you of the seed of Yisrael:
24 For He has not despised nor abhorred the affliction of the afflicted; neither has He hidden His face from him: but when he cried unto Him, He heard!
25 My praise shall be unto Thee in the great congregation: I will pay my vows before them that reverence Him.
26 The humble-meek shall eat and be satisfied: they that seek YHWH shall praise Him; your heart shall live for ever.

Testimony of Yeshua = the Word = the Bread of Life

 

[daqq]

I was primarily referring to the "burial in the sky" and its connection to the communal meal.

Mithraism, like Christianity, celebrated a communal meal which at first blush appears to be faux-cannibalism. (At second blush, both act out something different.)

But other parallels include a central place for a metaphorical marriage ceremony, baptismal rites using the four elements, and the use of anointing oil. Justin Martyr and Tertullian both wrote some on the parallels between the two (and of course to denounce the Mithraic cult.)

Ah, I see, and yes that theme is likewise found in Psalm 22 which Yeshua points to at Golgotha:

Psalm 22:22-26
22 I will declare Thy Name unto my brethren: in the midst of the congregation will I praise Thee.
23 You that reverence YHWH, praise Him; all you of the seed of Yaakob, glorify Him; and reverence Him all you of the seed of Yisrael:
24 For He has not despised nor abhorred the affliction of the afflicted; neither has He hidden His face from him: but when he cried unto Him, He heard!
25 My praise shall be unto Thee in the great congregation: I will pay my vows before them that reverence Him.
26 The humble-meek shall eat and be satisfied: they that seek YHWH shall praise Him; your heart shall live for ever.

Testimony of Yeshua = the Word = the Bread of Life

So then, having seen the statement from Psalm 22:26 and understanding it in the context of Golgotha and other things previously related herein; what does it imply concerning the following passage from Yeshayahu?

Isaiah 49:1-10
1 Listen, O isles, unto me; and hearken, O Gentiles from far; after a long time it shall come to pass, says YHWH, from the womb of my mother He has made mention of my name [cf. LXX].
2 And He has made my mouth like a sharp sword; in the shadow of His hand He has concealed me, and made me a polished shaft; in His quiver He has hidden me:
3 And said unto me, You are My servant, O Yisrael, [the firstborn] in whom I will be glorified.
4 Then I said, I have labored in vain, I have spent my strength for nought, and in vain: yet surely my judgment is with YHWH, and my work with my Elohei.
5 And now, says YHWH, who formed me from the womb to be His servant, to bring Yaakob again to Him, Though Yisrael be not gathered, yet shall I be glorious in-among the eyes of YHWH, [those seven are the eyes of YHWH, the seven holy Notzerim-Watchers sent forth into all the Land, Zec 3:9, Zec 4:10, Rev 5:6, Enoch 20:1] and my Elohei shall be my strength.
6 And He said, It is a light thing that you should be My servant to raise up the tribes of Yaakob, and to restore the Natzωrai of Yisrael: I will also give you for a light to the Gentiles, that you may be My Salvation [Yeshua-ti] unto the end of the earth.
7 Thus says YHWH, Redeemer of Yisrael His Holy One, to him whom man despises, to him whom the nation abhors, to a servant of rulers; Kings shall see, and arise, princes also shall bow down for the sake of YHWH; for the Holy One Yisrael is faithful, and I have choose you [cf. LXX].
8 Thus says YHWH, In an acceptable time have I heard you, [Isa 61:2a, Luke 4:19a, Psalm 22:24] and in the day of salvation have I helped you: and I will preserve you, [etzare-ka, (ref. Isaiah 49:6, the preserved, LXX "diaspora", James 1:1, 1Peter 1:1)] and give you for a covenant of the people, [testimony-doctrine-food] to establish the earth, to cause to be inherited the desolate heritages:
9 That you may say to the prisoners, Go forth; to them that are in darkness, Show yourselves! They shall feed in the ways, [Psalm 22:26] and their pastures shall be in all high places.
10 They shall neither hunger nor thirst; neither shall the heat nor the sun smite them: for he that has mercy on them shall lead them, even by the springs of water shall he guide them [Rev 7:16-17].

 

[daqq]

Abraham had quite a history with furnaces, didn't he? In the Midrash, Nimrod threw him into one. And there's this story in Jubilees.

Also, speaking of alternate vowel pointings, UR (the proper name of Abram's birthplace) with a different vowel pointing means... furnace.

I was just looking at this again, and checked in the LXX, and noticed that in the LXX they rendered χωρα-χωρας in the place of Ur, which as you probably already know is typically understood in modern times as country, region, space, territory, land, and so on:

Genesis 11:28-31 LXX Brenton Translation
28 And Arrhan died in the presence of Tharrha his father, in the land in which he was born, in the country [χωρα] of the Chaldees.
29 And Abram and Nachor took to themselves wives, the name of the wife of Abram was Sara, and the name of the wife of Nachor, Malcha, daughter of Arrhan, and he was the father of Malcha, the father of Jescha.
30 And Sara was barren, and did not bear children.
31 And Tharrha took Abram his son, and Lot the son Arrhan, the son of his son, and Sara his daughter-in-law, the wife of Abram his son, and led them forth out of the land [χωρας] of the Chaldees, to go into the land of Chanaan, and they came as far as Charrhan, and he dwelt there.

The two places where we see "country", (χωρα), and "land", (χωρας), in the above passage are the same two places where Ur appears in the Hebrew text. What is going on here? It appears they are rendering Ur/Or with a word that may actually mean both country and furnace at the same time, and thus, if this is so, then the rendering would be ingenious in that it might be read either way. If you look at the etymology of the name of the city Chorazin you will find that some lexicons state that the name of the city means "furnace of smoke", (G5523), which they get from one of the Hebrew words for furnace and the word for smoke, (Gen 15:17 - עשן).

כור - Deuteronomy 4:20 - 1 Kings 8:51 - Isaiah 48:10
כור - Kor - Kwr - Chor (χορ) - Chwra? (χωρα)?

χοραζιν = "furnace of smoke"
χορα (כור) + `ζιν (עשן) = עשן + כור
χοραζιν = כורעשן (silent `ayin = χορα-`ζιν)

So the following may also be an acceptable reading:

Genesis 11:28-31 LXX
28 And Arrhan died in the presence of Tharrha his father, in the land [γη] in which he was born, in the furnace [χωρα] of the Chaldees.
29 And Abram and Nachor took to themselves wives, the name of the wife of Abram was Sara, and the name of the wife of Nachor, Malcha, daughter of Arrhan, and he was the father of Malcha, the father of Jescha.
30 And Sara was barren, and did not bear children.
31 And Tharrha took Abram his son, and Lot the son Arrhan, the son of his son, and Sara his daughter-in-law, the wife of Abram his son, and led them forth out of the land-furnace [χωρας] of the Chaldees, to go into the land [γη] of Chanaan, and they came as far as Charrhan, and he dwelt there.

Interesting eh?

 

[Wick Stick]

I was just looking at this again, and checked in the LXX, and noticed that in the LXX they rendered χωρα-χωρας in the place of Ur, which as you probably already know is typically understood in modern times as country, region, space, territory, land, and so on:

Genesis 11:28-31 LXX Brenton Translation
28 And Arrhan died in the presence of Tharrha his father, in the land in which he was born, in the country [χωρα] of the Chaldees.
29 And Abram and Nachor took to themselves wives, the name of the wife of Abram was Sara, and the name of the wife of Nachor, Malcha, daughter of Arrhan, and he was the father of Malcha, the father of Jescha.
30 And Sara was barren, and did not bear children.
31 And Tharrha took Abram his son, and Lot the son Arrhan, the son of his son, and Sara his daughter-in-law, the wife of Abram his son, and led them forth out of the land [χωρας] of the Chaldees, to go into the land of Chanaan, and they came as far as Charrhan, and he dwelt there.

The two places where we see "country", (χωρα), and "land", (χωρας), in the above passage are the same two places where Ur appears in the Hebrew text. What is going on here? It appears they are rendering Ur/Or with a word that may actually mean both country and furnace at the same time, and thus, if this is so, then the rendering would be ingenious in that it might be read either way. If you look at the etymology of the name of the city Chorazin you will find that some lexicons state that the name of the city means "furnace of smoke", (G5523), which they get from one of the Hebrew words for furnace and the word for smoke, (Gen 15:17 - עשן).

כור - Deuteronomy 4:20 - 1 Kings 8:51 - Isaiah 48:10
כור - Kor - Kwr - Chor (χορ) - Chwra? (χωρα)?

χοραζιν = "furnace of smoke"
χορα (כור) + `ζιν (עשן) = עשן + כור
χοραζιν = כורעשן (silent `ayin = χορα-`ζιν)

So the following may also be an acceptable reading:

Genesis 11:28-31 LXX
28 And Arrhan died in the presence of Tharrha his father, in the land [γη] in which he was born, in the furnace [χωρα] of the Chaldees.
29 And Abram and Nachor took to themselves wives, the name of the wife of Abram was Sara, and the name of the wife of Nachor, Malcha, daughter of Arrhan, and he was the father of Malcha, the father of Jescha.
30 And Sara was barren, and did not bear children.
31 And Tharrha took Abram his son, and Lot the son Arrhan, the son of his son, and Sara his daughter-in-law, the wife of Abram his son, and led them forth out of the land-furnace [χωρας] of the Chaldees, to go into the land [γη] of Chanaan, and they came as far as Charrhan, and he dwelt there.

Interesting eh?

Scholarship traces the origins of the story to Jubilees, which expands on Genesis. IN this case, it explains why Abram's brother Haran died before his father, a fact recorded in the Torah without explanation.

I only ever read half of Jubilees, concluding early on that it was a book of fairy tales penned to stoke nationalism by the Hasmoneans.

Perhaps you found more there than I did?

 

[daqq]

Scholarship traces the origins of the story to Jubilees, which expands on Genesis. IN this case, it explains why Abram's brother Haran died before his father, a fact recorded in the Torah without explanation.

I only ever read half of Jubilees, concluding early on that it was a book of fairy tales penned to stoke nationalism by the Hasmoneans.

Perhaps you found more there than I did?

You probably got further through the book of Jubilees than I did, (lol, but I probably skimmed more than half), imo the work has either been badly tinkered with, (maybe by some scribe or even an early Christian scholar with a hankering to prove a certain chronology), or the original author neither understood Enoch nor the Jubile-Yoblim cycles, (or both, which is probably more likely). The Enoch calendar in the section called the book of the luminaries is observed from somewhere further south, for example Egypt, and maybe even southern Egypt, (or maybe even what used to be considered northern Ethiopia), but not from the latitudes at Yerushalem or Qumran. I do not believe the Enoch calendar is a calendar of 364 days but rather 365 because the Day of Judgment is one day taken from the calendar which simply means that day is concealed, (Enoch 81:4-6). The book of 1Enoch is written from the perspective of the pre-flood age and the Day of Judgement is the missing day; the day of the coming of the deluge, (2/17, the Autumnal Equinox in that age).

 

[Wick Stick]

The Enoch calendar in the section called the book of the luminaries is observed from somewhere further south, for example Egypt, and maybe even southern Egypt, (or maybe even what used to be considered northern Ethiopia), but not from the latitudes at Yerushalem or Qumran.

Prior to the Dead Sea Scrolls discovery, the Book of Enoch was preserved only by the Ethiopian church. The only English translation I've seen is the one Charles did in 1917, and it was translated from Ethiopic. It would make sense that whatever was written there might have been... adjusted, shall we say?.. to fit the geography of those who were using it.

Do the copies among the DSS differ in these details and instead reflect the latitudes of the Essene community, or of Jerusalem? The question may not be answerable with current resources.

I do not believe the Enoch calendar is a calendar of 364 days but rather 365 because the Day of Judgment is one day taken from the calendar which simply means that day is concealed, (Enoch 81:4-6). The book of 1Enoch is written from the perspective of the pre-flood age and the Day of Judgement is the missing day; the day of the coming of the deluge, (2/17, the Autumnal Equinox in that age).

I read the whole link. I understood the theory of what you (you? can I assume this is your original work?) propose there, though I hardly can match it against reality to fact-check it. You seem to have spent much effort aligning your theory against Biblical dates, though. Or perhaps the other way round - inducing the theory from the dates?

A little disclosure here - I am absolutely terrible with dates and times. I can make plans and map things out with a calendar just fine, but for whatever reason, I can't seem to track exactly when I am very well. The calendar/clock in my mind seems to be permanently detached from reality. :dunce: I am fortunate that my work affords me an assistant whose job description is largely to hold me to my own schedule. :chuckle:

Ok then, takeaways, questions, and thoughts...

If you're right, there's a lot of poor translation in our Bibles. Also, the pattern built up in the OT is that of a much much shorter chronology than one would think at first.

How does Enoch's prophecy of weeks fit into your theory? I have been of the opinion that it described weeks of generations. Others have tried to make it into an affirmation of day-age theories, with which I disagree.

Comparing Genesis 8:22 to Isaiah 24:5 - is this a case of God fulfilling the promise in spite of man, or does man's transgression of the covenant undermine the promise? What about if we read 'the people of yisrael' for 'eretz?' Does the verse now predict the end of Yisrael as being related to their calendrical deficiencies?

How did you spend that much time in Daniel, on chronology, and never cite Daniel 7:25? You comments on the verse invited. Specifically, who is "he?"

 

[daqq]

Prior to the Dead Sea Scrolls discovery, the Book of Enoch was preserved only by the Ethiopian church. The only English translation I've seen is the one Charles did in 1917, and it was translated from Ethiopic. It would make sense that whatever was written there might have been... adjusted, shall we say?.. to fit the geography of those who were using it.

Do the copies among the DSS differ in these details and instead reflect the latitudes of the Essene community, or of Jerusalem? The question may not be answerable with current resources.


I read the whole link. I understood the theory of what you (you? can I assume this is your original work?) propose there, though I hardly can match it against reality to fact-check it. You seem to have spent much effort aligning your theory against Biblical dates, though. Or perhaps the other way round - inducing the theory from the dates?

A little disclosure here - I am absolutely terrible with dates and times. I can make plans and map things out with a calendar just fine, but for whatever reason, I can't seem to track exactly when I am very well. The calendar/clock in my mind seems to be permanently detached from reality. :dunce: I am fortunate that my work affords me an assistant whose job description is largely to hold me to my own schedule. :chuckle:

Ok then, takeaways, questions, and thoughts...

If you're right, there's a lot of poor translation in our Bibles. Also, the pattern built up in the OT is that of a much much shorter chronology than one would think at first.

How does Enoch's prophecy of weeks fit into your theory? I have been of the opinion that it described weeks of generations. Others have tried to make it into an affirmation of day-age theories, with which I disagree.

Comparing Genesis 8:22 to Isaiah 24:5 - is this a case of God fulfilling the promise in spite of man, or does man's transgression of the covenant undermine the promise? What about if we read 'the people of yisrael' for 'eretz?' Does the verse now predict the end of Yisrael as being related to their calendrical deficiencies?

How did you spend that much time in Daniel, on chronology, and never cite Daniel 7:25? You comments on the verse invited. Specifically, who is "he?"

If you wish to pick my brain I'm all for it but I work best with one main point at a time, (we all have our deficiencies, ). The Land, (eretz), is every man, ("all Yisrael", whether male or female on the outside), and represents the flesh, (the outer bounds "profane area" of the body temple). The adamah-soil is the soil of the heart as in the parable of the sower; all things are expounded in the sevenfold parables of the Master, (sevenfold in meaning and teaching). All the Prophets and the Torah prophesied until Yohanan; and this no doubt includes the flood narrative which is taking ancient mythos, (Genesis tablet theory), and prophesying the fulfillment of the new man created as a new creation in Messiah at Golgotha, (which occurs in the "sixth [great] day" at the "end of the age"). The flood dates correspond to the ministry of Messiah because they are ultimately fulfilled in that acceptable year of the Father, (the commencement is announced in Luke 4:17-21 and Mark 1:15, and this acceptable year is "the day of YHWH", even the same τη κυριακη ημερα, [Rev 1:10]). The Testimony of Messiah now governs all interpretation of the Torah and Prophets, (because the Father sealed his Testimony and approved it for holy spiritual food to be consumed by His people), and all is therefore supernal and internal; for the words that he spoke are Spirit, and everything shall be fulfilled to each in his or her own appointed times, and thus it is ongoing, and none of it shall pass away, (except that it will be transformed in you as you are transformed in your walk). As for Daniel 7:25, is that correct or is it a type-o? Did you mean Daniel 9:25? It seems more like you probably meant Daniel 9:25. The Septuagint reading of the famous Daniel 9:24-27 passage differs greatly, that is, the Old Greek differs greatly, (the church has replaced the Old Greek text with the Theodotion version which, although it came well before the Hebrew Masorete text, seems to agree quite well with the later Hebrew, [hint, hint]).

 

[Wick Stick]

Danny 7:25 - "change times and law" seems relevant to a discussion of changing the feasts and the chronology of the Jewish calendar. No?

 

[daqq]

Danny 7:25 - "change times and law" seems relevant to a discussion of changing the feasts and the chronology of the Jewish calendar. No?

Ah, so you did mean that, my apologies as I simply thought you meant Daniel 9 because of the discussion in that page which was referenced. A discussion of the four dominions, (literal historic understanding), would be necessary in order to see my understanding of those things: for that is precisely what happened, (they changed the times, not me, lol). The lion's wings of a golden eagle were plucked out by Matthias and his talmidim, (with axes), a true and final historical literal fulfillment concerning the lion or lioness. And that did not bode well for the twofold Tzaddukim raised up on the one side of the Kohanim, (the other side, the Qumranite-Zadokites, are similarly Tzaddokim), nor did it bode well for the four-headed party of the P'rushim with their long blue striped tzitziyot for show in the four corners of the wings of their curves, (beware the leaven of Herod, and of the leaven of the Sadducees, and of the leaven of the Pharisees; for the kingdom of the heavens is like unto leaven, which a woman took, and hid in three measures of meal, until the whole was leavened). Once upon a trial there rose up a minyan, a minyan, a scribe, and the Ab Bet Din with the Nasiy Prince; the Sanhedrin criminal court of twenty three: ten toes, ten horns, a scribe, (from the sea of the people), and a two-horned beast out of the Land with two little horns like a lamb but speaking like a drakon, (Ananus ben Seth, Ab Bet Din, and Yoseph Kaiaphas, Nasiy Prince). A fourth generation beast, dreadful and terrible, having great teeth of iron: teeth like swords, and jaw teeth like knives, to devour the needy from off the Land and the ebionim from among men. Why do you suppose the heart of the man Nebuchadnezzar was changed from the heart of a man to the heart of a beast in Daniel 4:16? And why then is the lion or lioness, (Septuagint), given the heart of a man in Daniel 7:4? And why then does the composite beast of Revelation 13:1-6 speak with the mouth of a lion? It is because, as usual, Messiah expounds all things; and therefore what comes forth from the mouth proceeds from the heart: if one speaks like a lion it is because the heart has been given over to the first beast of a lion or lioness; and the next beast of man is like unto a she-bear robbed of her cubs, (there are four generations to the first "age" of the man like the four seasons in the full circuit of a year: autumn, winter, spring, and the summer of your harvest, lol). This matter is by decree of the seven holy Watchers, and by the command of the Memra-Word of the holy ones, to the intent that the living may know that the Most High rules in the dominion(s) of men, and will give it over to whomsoever He will, and sets up over it the humblest of men. But as for a historical fulfillment perspective having come first:

1) Herod (Lion)
1a) Herodians (Matthew 22:16 - Mark 3:6 - Mark 12:13)

2) Kohanim - Leviim (Bear)
2a) Tzaddukim - Sadducees (Chief Kohanim - Tzadoki - Leviim (Yerushalem))
2b) Tzaddokim - Essenes (Tzadoki - Leviim - Ebionim (Dam-meshek Qumran - "blood inheritor"))

3) Perushim (Pharisees (Leopard))
3a) Beit Hillel (Perushim)
3b) Hasidim (Perushim - Ebionim (Galil))
3c) Beit Shammai (Perushim)
3d) Kanaim (Zealots (Shammai Perushim))

4) Sanhedrin Criminal Court of 23 (only rises from the pit when an execution is at hand, lol).

 

[freelight]

Love ancient texts................

Love ancient texts................

The Septuagint reading of the famous Daniel 9:24-27 passage differs greatly, that is, the Old Greek differs greatly, (the church has replaced the Old Greek text with the Theodotion version which, although it came well before the Hebrew Masorete text, seems to agree quite well with the later Hebrew, [hint, hint]).

What I would give for a exact duplicate of Origen's original Hexapla! - hopefully its discovered intact one day, but would it see the light of day? Its tragic that some amazing volumes of ancient literature once preserved in the Library of Caesarea are lost forever, unless copies exist yet to be discovered. - Origen and Clement of Alexandria are among my favorite church fathers, - I have an affinity with the Alexandrian school

 

[daqq]

What I would give for a exact duplicate of Origen's original Hexapla! - hopefully its discovered intact one day, but would it see the light of day? Its tragic that some amazing volumes of ancient literature once preserved in the Library of Caesarea are lost forever, unless copies exist yet to be discovered. - Origen and Clement of Alexandria are among my favorite church fathers, - I have an affinity with the Alexandrian school

Origen was considered the father of exegesis, (not sure if he still is now that the church anathematized him in the second council of Constantinople), he is considered the first to critically exegete the koine Greek writings and come up with "a theologic understanding" based in his exegesis of various texts and contextual statements, (and he certainly knew the language of koine because it was still somewhat current in his day, or at least he was not far removed from it). He asserted that "the Christ", as the Word, was "a god", (from the lack of an article in John 1:1), which is likewise still found in the extant Coptic texts of John 1:1 to this day, (Coptic has an indefinite article, such as "a" or "an", and the indefinite article is used in the Coptic text, though the Coptic church has apparently been admonished by the momma church not to read that text aloud in their services). He likewise mentions what most agree is probably the Protoevangelium of James, (Apokalypse Yaakob, the Tzaddik, [with a writer's ink horn by his side]). The reason why the Byzantine text family is so much more prevalent is only because it was allowable in the eastern empire for the common people to have in their possession the scripture writings. This means that the Byzantine text family has been copied and recopied thousands and thousands of times more than the Alexandrian family of texts. As for myself this means also that the Byzantine family is by default much more susceptible to scribal error, alterations to the text, and church dogma having crept in over time simply because of the fact that the Byzantine family was recopied so much more abundantly over such a long stretch of time. For the same reason I trust the Westcott Hort for the NT because it is based in the Alexandrian family of texts; a fair standard text in English translation would of course be the ASV, (the KJV NT follows the Textus Receptus which was openly stated to have been haphazardly compiled by Erasmus [merely so as to showcase his fabulous new Latin translation he was trying to sell; however no one wanted the Latin but fell in love with his Textus Receptus junk text, lol]).

 

[freelight]

Origen was considered the father of exegesis, (not sure if he still is now that the church anathematized him in the second council of Constantinople), he is considered the first to critically exegete the koine Greek writings and come up with "a theologic understanding" based in his exegesis of various texts and contextual statements, (and he certainly knew the language of koine because it was still somewhat current in his day, or at least he was not far removed from it). He asserted that "the Christ", as the Word, was "a god", (from the lack of an article in John 1:1), which is likewise still found in the extant Coptic texts of John 1:1 to this day, (Coptic has an indefinite article, such as "a" or "an", and the indefinite article is used in the Coptic text, though the Coptic church has apparently been admonished by the momma church not to read that text aloud in their services). He likewise mentions what most agree is probably the Protoevangelium of James, (Apokalypse Yaakob, the Tzaddik, [with a writer's ink horn by his side]). The reason why the Byzantine text family is so much more prevalent is only because it was allowable in the eastern empire for the common people to have in their possession the scripture writings. This means that the Byzantine text family has been copied and recopied thousands and thousands of times more than the Alexandrian family of texts. As for myself this means also that the Byzantine family is by default much more susceptible to scribal error, alterations to the text, and church dogma having crept in over time simply because of the fact that the Byzantine family was recopied so much more abundantly over such a long stretch of time. For the same reason I trust the Westcott Hort for the NT because it is based in the Alexandrian family of texts; a fair standard text in English translation would of course be the ASV, (the KJV NT follows the Textus Receptus which was openly stated to have been haphazardly compiled by Erasmus [merely so as to showcase his fabulous new Latin translation he was trying to sell; however no one wanted the Latin but fell in love with his Textus Receptus junk text, lol]).

Bingo.

Origen also was learned in Hebrew, hence his expertise in knowing both Hebrew and Greek was invaluable in his transmission of the scriptures. I like Westcott and Hort translation too....even if the KJV Only folks demonize it. Those folks are nuts. Lol

 

[Zeke]

The Spirit speaks the same "NOW" regardless of what is historically recorded by different sects who claim ownership.

 

[freelight]

Shekinah lights........

Shekinah lights........

The Spirit speaks the same "NOW" regardless of what is historically recorded by different sects who claim ownership.

Yes, Absolute Reality is being what it IS (in the absolute sense), always evertlastingly so, everpresently NOW - yet all relative truths arise within the greater matrix of this Infinite One, and is 'relative' because such points of reference are conditioned/modified by space and time, further being filtered thru our finite minds. Only as we tap into the Infinite Mind and Spirit, do we come to reflect, mirror and intuit infinity. Only the infinite can know the infinite.

We do enjoy dissecting, joining, correlating, intersecting various points within the cosmic membrane.

What 'Yeshua' says is a wonderful subject however, provided we have some authentic recordings of his actual words, although it might be likely that some 'nuances' or 'inflections' have been changed, corrupted or transfigured over the centuries, hence the wonderful non-canonical books and apocryphal gospels to wet our palate, that might be fragments of his 'lost' teaching. Its a wonderful journey, don't you think? :surf:

 

[balut55]

He has definitely brought the sword to the Philippines. 9 out of ten philipinos agree with summary executions. Is Isis a sword? Isis is married to Osiris the God of death. Their child is Horus ,the all seeing eye of the NWO. TPTB even use Egyptian God names right in you face. Jesus comes to divide and the Pope comes to make peace. Lol. One of them is wrong. Guess who.


Sent from my iPhone using TOL

 

[balut55]

Red against blue. Democrats against republicans. Crips against bloods. Red and blue become purple in the forced peace of the NWO.


Sent from my iPhone using TOL

 

[daqq]

Red against blue. Democrats against republicans. Crips against bloods. Red and blue become purple in the forced peace of the NWO.


Sent from my iPhone using TOL

I already have a new world order. In a [strong] head Elohim cuts down the shamayim and the eretz: and the eretz is desert-wasteland, and empty, and the darkness upon its face is deep: and Ruach Elohim broods over its countenance, the waters. And Elohim says, "Let there be light", and there is light. So Elohim approves the light, because it is good, and Elohim separates between the light and the darkness: and Elohim calls the light, "Yom", and the darkness He calls "Laylah", and there is evening, and there is morning, the waning and the waxing of an hour, Yom Echad. I am the light of the world: a seven congregation city laying outstretched upon the mountain of Elohim cannot be hidden.