• Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
    • Access to private conversations with other members.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

An Act Of War!

atpollard

Active Member
”Forgive them, for they know not what they do."

Remember Cain.
Not first hand, he was before my time ...
... but if I remember the story, he killed his brother because God liked Able's offering and rejected Cain's.
... then God cursed Cain so he couldn't be a farmer any more and he was driven away from the community.

So who is it that shouldn't be allowed to farm?
Is that really our decision to make?

What about remember Galatians 5:15.
Was that your point? ;)
 

Latuwr

Member
Hi Sleeppy,

Blessings to you through Messiah Yahushua, My YAHWEH and My ELOHIM!

Shabbat Shalom!

Ordinarily, both men and women pay attention to the last words of an individual who is ready to pass away. Last words are precious, and with respect to My Messiah Yahushua, they are extremely important. Do you have any idea why Messiah restricted HIS request for forgiveness only for the ignorant? In your opinion, were there any in or about the Cross of Messiah that had access to any real intelligence concerning HIS suffering and death?

Of course, I personally believe that at the time of HIS execution no one had any idea concerning what was happening and the very work which My Messiah Yahushua was accomplishing through HIS Cross? How about you yourself? Do you know why forgiveness can only be granted to the ignorant in HIS murder?

Thanking you in advance should you be moved to reply, I am,

Sincerely, Latuwr
 

Latuwr

Member
Hi ShivaFan,

Blessings to you through Messiah Yahushua, My YAHWEH and My ELOHIM!

Please, if you are so inclined to inform me, what is a "banjee"?

Thanking you in advance should you be moved to reply, I am,

Sincerely, Latuwr
 

outhouse

Atheistically
Strong says the Greek is Iēsous which is from the Hebrew
יְהוֹשׁוּעַYᵉhôwshûwaʻ,
or
יְהוֹשֻׁעַ Yᵉhôwshuʻa;

That reaches the limit of my ability to contribute to this particular conversation.
Good luck.

Which was not the Galileans name as he would have used or heard.
 

outhouse

Atheistically
Shalom atpollard and outhouse, many have looked into the spelling and pronunciation of Yeshua's name, and I would not be critical of the various Hebrew representations. I certainly would consider Yahushua an acceptable variation. A pretty exhaustive study of how to look at the various pronunciations can be found here, even though I am not in complete agreement with everything that is believed by this individual, he has done a remarkable job of putting his understanding of this to paper. Blessings in The Name, ImAHebrew.

I'm sorry

Your link is not credible and that is also not the name he would have ever heard.

Here is a clue


He was Aramaic, and Hebrew was not a language used. Even the temple in Jerusalem used Aramaic and Koine Greek
 

Ken Brown

Well-Known Member
I'm sorry

Your link is not credible and that is also not the name he would have ever heard.

Here is a clue

He was Aramaic, and Hebrew was not a language used. Even the temple in Jerusalem used Aramaic and Koine Greek
Shalom outhouse, thank you for taking the time to examine the link, and your response to it. I must say, your response dictates that I ask you several questions:

1. When Yeshua read from the Torah and Prophets (as His custom was-Luke 4:16), would He had been reading and speaking Aramaic, or Hebrew?
2. When Yeshua said, "one jot or one tittle shall in no wise pass from the Law," was He speaking about Aramaic "jots and tittles," or Hebrew "jots and tittles?" (Matthew 5:18)
3. When Yeshua spoke in Hebrew to Paul (Acts of the Apostles 26:14), why would Paul tell King Agrippa that Yeshua spoke in Hebrew, when He, as you claim, was Aramaic, and Hebrew was not a language used?
4. When Pilate had the writing, "Yeshua of Nazareth King of the Jews," placed on the Cross, why did Pilate not use Aramaic? (John 19:20)
5. Is Jozef Milik in error when he states..."Mishnic [Hebrew] ... was at that time the spoken dialect of the inhabitants of Judaea?" (Ten Years of Discovery in the Wilderness of Judaea)

Outhouse, I believe your "clue" may be in error, which would then validate the link. Blessings in the Name, ImAHebrew.
 

outhouse

Atheistically
Shalom outhouse, thank you for taking the time to examine the link, and your response to it. I must say, your response dictates that I ask you several questions:

1. When Yeshua read from the Torah and Prophets (as His custom was-Luke 4:16), would He had been reading and speaking Aramaic, or Hebrew?
2. When Yeshua said, "one jot or one tittle shall in no wise pass from the Law," was He speaking about Aramaic "jots and tittles," or Hebrew "jots and tittles?" (Matthew 5:18)
3. When Yeshua spoke in Hebrew to Paul (Acts of the Apostles 26:14), why would Paul tell King Agrippa that Yeshua spoke in Hebrew, when He, as you claim, was Aramaic, and Hebrew was not a language used?
4. When Pilate had the writing, "Yeshua of Nazareth King of the Jews," placed on the Cross, why did Pilate not use Aramaic? (John 19:20)
5. Is Jozef Milik in error when he states..."Mishnic [Hebrew] ... was at that time the spoken dialect of the inhabitants of Judaea?" (Ten Years of Discovery in the Wilderness of Judaea)

Outhouse, I believe your "clue" may be in error, which would then validate the link. Blessings in the Name, ImAHebrew.

Nothing you wrote is historical. It is apologetic, based on your literal reading of text written in koine Greek by people far removed from jesus life who never heard a word he said, and did not see anything.



His native language he was raised in was Aramaic not Hebrew. Hebrew was almost non existent in this time period
 

outhouse

Atheistically
He had been reading and speaking Aramaic, or Hebrew?

His possible literacy or illiteracy is not known.

They only way to know this is to know the socioeconomic status of his life, and that is still heavily debated. Anthropology leans to a peasant illiterate type.
 

Ken Brown

Well-Known Member
Nothing you wrote is historical. It is apologetic, based on your literal reading of text written in koine Greek by people far removed from jesus life who never heard a word he said, and did not see anything.

His native language he was raised in was Aramaic not Hebrew. Hebrew was almost non existent in this time period
Shalom outhouse, why did Jozef Milik, who published more texts from the Dead Sea Scrolls than any other original team member, write "Mishnic [Hebrew] ... was at that time the spoken dialect of the inhabitants of Judaea?" And why didn't Pilate include Aramaic as another language to the other three (Hebrew, Latin, & Greek) for the Title of Yeshua? Does your historical evidence overwhelm logic? Blessings in The Name, ImAHebrew
 

outhouse

Atheistically
And why didn't Pilate include Aramaic as another language to the other three (Hebrew, Latin, & Greek) for the Title of Yeshua?

The NT text was written in Koine Greek NOT Hebrew. Not one book in the first century was written in Hebrew

Pilate never wrote a word about Jesus so stop it. Only people who were not witness to anything wrote and made statements


Does your historical evidence overwhelm logic?

No it overwhelms those who use faith instead of academia
 

outhouse

Atheistically
Shalom outhouse, why did Jozef Milik, who published more texts from the Dead Sea Scrolls than any other original team member, write "Mishnic [Hebrew] ... was at that time the spoken dialect of the inhabitants of Judaea

First of all the DDS can date as far back as 300 before jesus existed. That is almost 400 years prior to the NT text.

Under the category of post-Achaemenid is Hasmonaean Aramaic, the official language of Hasmonaean Judaea (142–37 BC). It influenced the Biblical Aramaic of the Qumran texts, and was the main language of non-biblical theological texts of that community.
 

ThirtyThree

Well-Known Member
Does Christianity have any real idea of how the ELOHIM go about fighting a War should THEY decide to do so?

Obviously, this scripture indicates that when the ELOHIM fight, THEIR fight is to the death. THEY hold nothing back. When THEY fight, it is total warfare. The ELOHIM seek rightly for the total destruction of THEIR enemies.

If we fully understood how the ELOHIM go about fighting in a spiritual sense, would this not help us to understand how we should fight our enemies in a physical sense? What do you think? Should Christianity love Islam to death, or should Christianity fight Islam in a physical sense to a no holds bar fight to the death according to the Scriptures?

I am impressed. I have not seen that type of spirit in a Christian for years! That is the type of thing I respect.

The majority of Christians today do believe they can love the radical Islamic hordes to death. The idea of that is ridiculous to any rational person! When in a war, one fights. To fight, one must know there is an enemy and one must know their enemy. Christianity has been utterly pacified from its former glory, if you ask me. Then, I happen to adore war.
 

Ken Brown

Well-Known Member
First of all the DDS can date as far back as 300 before jesus existed. That is almost 400 years prior to the NT text.

Under the category of post-Achaemenid is Hasmonaean Aramaic, the official language of Hasmonaean Judaea (142–37 BC). It influenced the Biblical Aramaic of the Qumran texts, and was the main language of non-biblical theological texts of that community.
Shalom outhouse, so Jozef Milik is clueless? Someone who studied and translated more DDS than anyone else of the original team, his statement is in error? Blessings in The Name, ImAHebrew.
 

outhouse

Atheistically

moorea944

Well-Known Member
Hi Everyone,

Blessings to you through Messiah Yahushua, My YAHWEH and My ELOHIM!

Shabbat Shalom!

Does Christianity have any real idea of how the ELOHIM go about fighting a War should THEY decide to do so? Most Christians have no understanding that the Cross was an act of war. Consider this scripture:

Hebrews 2:14
14 Forasmuch then as the children are partakers of flesh and blood, he also himself likewise took part of the same; that through death he might destroy him that had the power of death, that is, the devil;

Obviously, this scripture indicates that when the ELOHIM fight, THEIR fight is to the death. THEY hold nothing back. When THEY fight, it is total warfare. The ELOHIM seek rightly for the total destruction of THEIR enemies.

If we fully understood how the ELOHIM go about fighting in a spiritual sense, would this not help us to understand how we should fight our enemies in a physical sense? What do you think? Should Christianity love Islam to death, or should Christianity fight Islam in a physical sense to a no holds bar fight to the death according to the Scriptures?

Thanking any in advance that should be moved to reply, I am,

Sincerely, Latuwr

The cross was not an act of war, but an act of love. "For God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have everlasting life."
 

Ken Brown

Well-Known Member
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Language_of_Jesus

It is generally agreed that Jesus and his disciples primarily spoke Aramaic, the common language of Judea in the first century AD, most likely a Galilean dialect distinguishable from that of Jerusalem

The towns of Nazareth and Capernaum in Galilee, where Jesus spent most of his time, were Aramaic-speaking communities
Shalom outhouse, there is no disagreement that Yeshua could have had Aramaic as one of the main languages He spoke, as John 3:34 states He was given the Spirit without measure. If you recall the account of the Disciples at Pentecost, there were many different languages being spoken by the Jews who were there to celebrate that Feast, and the Spirit descended upon them to where they could converse in those different languages (Acts of the Apostles 2:4-5, Acts of the Apostles 2:6-7, Acts of the Apostles 2:8-11). So yes, no doubt, Yeshua had a very keen ability to converse in Aramaic, but that is NOT our debate or disagreement.

You wrote, "He was Aramaic, and Hebrew was not a language used," along with, "His native language he was raised in was Aramaic not Hebrew. Hebrew was almost non existent in this time period." And you use this logic to promote that Yeshua would not have been given a "Hebrew" name, and the Hebrew name "Yahushua" would never have been used or heard by Him. That is where we disagree, and NOT on whether or not Yeshua spoke Aramaic. Blessings in The Name, ImAHebrew.
 
Top