satan vrs satanas

[Deleted]

D" You and your wife are multiple people – DUH

According to you – you and your first wife are one
You and your second wife are just adulteres
(Jewish view – scriptural view)
R" See the problem, you think outside of God's thinking

and two,

you invent the word game idea to make details, where God doesn't.

Human beings in Hebrew are called "Adam" from "adamuh" the ground we came from. Not some spirit and the ground, as you claim. It is the living GOD that empowers the matter to become living energy, the term in Hebrew called nephesh.,

"multiple people" is not a Hebrew term, though I suppose you can call many of "Adam" an assembly.
The word "echad" means cardinally one, or compounded as one, same idea.

Jeff Benner explains the two edged blades of a single sword, using the child root idea of echad.

Marriage is not a concept of assembly of humans, but two contrasting loving personalities becomes cardinally one being.

Have you never considered this Hebrew verse, and it's message?

Le 18:8 The nakedness of thy father's wife shalt thou not uncover: it is thy father's nakedness.

What commentaries do Jews make of this verse, I wonder?

God does not consider the other half, another being, but her body is the same as his body. This is what echad means. Compound unity.

D"YES – it is called context – your argument is that there is no context from additional Hebrew writtings
According to you – we cannot tell what the Hebrew people though or believed through their own writtings
According to you 99.99% of all Hebrew writing is error – no truth in it
The only Hebrew writing that is OK – is the Roman approved of version
R" I generally do not read context that much, because most of us do not even agree with the word meanings, let alone the meanings of sentences found in other sentences.

Most of us do not consider words have single basic meaning regardless of the sentence it is in.
Some words like polysemy have single basic meanings too, but the meaning is found by the sentence it is in.

Some words which have verb and noun forms, have different actions depending upon the sentence it is in.

I prefer to stick to the easier verses and the word meanings first. The Hebrew idioms are best left last.
You on the other hand make Hebrew words into completely different ideas.

For example in Hebrew the word for satan verb or noun, is written as STN, three letter root.

If this was translated by the Greeks, the same word and its meaning must be the same. In Greek the word is satanas. However in Dave's thinking this word suddenly has an entirely different meaning.
In your thinking the NT word satanas means the Hebrew word shedim, the devils who are demigods from having sex with humans, also known as archons. Somehow your attorney angel prosecuting sins is mentioned only once in the NT according to you. I find that rather strange.

We know from certainty Matthew was Hebrew once and was translated in Greek.

THis verse predicts this : Isa 28:11 ....and another tongue will he speak to this people.

THis another tongue is Greek and now English.

Mt 4:10 Then saith Jesus unto him, Get thee hence, Satan: for it is written, Thou shalt worship the Lord thy God, and him only shalt thou serve.

Now since Matthew was written in Hebrew, this word Satanas in Greek, has to be ha-satan in Hebrew.

It's a no brainer Dave, but you ignore every discussion I have with you.

You can't find a single scholar who agrees with you. I am still waiting.

Now suddenly that makes every verse that uses STN a creature also called shedim or devil.

I quote"

What does the Bible say about shedim?
Paul uses the word daimonion, one of the words used frequently in the New Testament for evil spiritual beings, to translate shedim in Deuteronomy 32:17. Paul knew his Hebrew Bible and didn’t deny the reality of the shedim, who are elohim.
Scholars of Paul’s first letter to the Corinthians know that in the apostle’s warning to not fellowship with demons (1 Cor. 10:20), Paul’s comments follow the history of the Israelites described in Deuteronomy 32. He warns believers against fellowship with demons on the basis of Israel’s failure in worshiping other gods. Paul uses the word daimonion, one of the words used frequently in the New Testament for evil spiritual beings, to translate shedim in Deuteronomy 32:17. Paul knew his Hebrew Bible and didn’t deny the reality of the shedim, who are elohim.
Those who want to avoid the clarity of Psalm 82 argue that the gods are only idols. As such, they aren’t real. This argument is flatly contradicted by Scripture. It’s also illogical and shows a misunderstanding of the rationale of idolatry.

With respect to Scripture, one need look no further than Deuteronomy 32:17:

“They [the Israelites] sacrificed to demons [shedim], not God [eloah], to gods [elohim] whom they had not known.”

The verse explicitly calls the elohim that the Israelites perversely worshiped demons (shedim). This rarely used term (Deut. 32:17; Psa. 106:37) comes from the Akkadian shedu. In the ancient Near East, the term shedu was neutral; it could speak of a good or malevolent spirit being.
Several Old Testament passages describe this administrative structure existing in the heavenly realm, as well. Psalm 82 is perhaps the clearest—and perhaps the most startling. The psalm refers to Yahweh’s administration as a council. The first verse reads:

“God (elohim) stands in the divine assembly;
he administers judgment in the midst of the gods (elohim).”
End quote"

These shedim are considered in Scritpure as elohiym, as Dave points out "false gods".

Consider the term Paul uses in the NT,

1Co 10:20 But I say, that the things which the Gentiles sacrifice, they sacrifice to devils, and not to God: and I would not that ye should have fellowship with devils.

There are 52 verses in the NT that use the term "shedim".

Mt 9:34 But the Pharisees said, He casteth out devils through the prince of the devils.

Notice the chief of shedim is termed "archon".

Not as Dave says there are many archons, the chief shedim is term "archon shedim".

This is the "archon shedim" that Jesus came to cast out from the earth.

Joh 12:31 Now is the judgment of this world: now shall the prince of this world be cast out.
Same term used "archon shedim" is to be cast out.

Mt 12:24 But when the Pharisees heard it, they said, This fellow doth not cast out devils, but by Beelzebub the prince of the devils.
Jews consider "by Beelzebub the prince of the devils." This is Beelzebub is the archon shedim.
Mt 12:24 But when the Pharisees heard it, they said, This fellow doth not cast out devils, but by Beelzebub the prince of the devils.
25 And Jesus knew their thoughts, and said unto them, Every kingdom divided against itself is brought to desolation; and every city or house divided against itself shall not stand: 26 And if Satan cast out Satan, he is divided against himself; how shall then his kingdom stand? 27 And if I by Beelzebub cast out devils, by whom do your children cast them out? therefore they shall be your judges. 28 But if I cast out devils by the Spirit of God, then the kingdom of God is come unto you

This passage is very significant.

First we must translate the passage back into Hebrew words. So we can link the same word meanings to the original word meaning in the OT.

daimonion = shedim
Satanas = ha-satan
Grk#:758  / ar-khone (noun): Ruler Freq:&37
Heb#:4428 מלך / me-lekh (noun): King—The male ruler
of a nation or city state.
Heb#:5387 נשיא / na-si (noun): Captain—A military
leader; the commander of a unit or a body of troops. The
leader of a family, tribe or people as one who carries the
burdens of the people.
Heb#:7218 ראש / rosh (noun): Head—The top of the
body. A person in authority or role of leader. The top,
beginning or first of something.
Heb#:8269 שר / sar (noun): Noble—Possessing
outstanding qualities or properties. Of high birth or
exalted rank. One who has authority. May also mean
"heavy" from the weight of responsibility on one in
authority.

Jeff Benner consider 758 archon as many of possible Hebrew.

sar = prince is one example I choose among his choices.

25 And Jesus knew their thoughts, and said unto them, Every kingdom divided against itself is brought to desolation; and every city or house divided against itself shall not stand: 26 And if ha-satan cast out ha-satan, ha-satan is divided against ha-satan; how shall then his kingdom stand? 27 And if I by Beelzebub cast out shedim, by whom do your children cast them out? therefore they shall be your judges. 28 But if I cast out shedim by the Spirit of God, then the kingdom of God is come unto you.
IN my opinion, the ha-satan is the prince of shedim, known to Jews as Beelzebub, or one of ha-satan's generals. The rest of the shedim are under the direct control of the ha-satan.

This is a completely different view than Dave's.

D"I have tried to get you to look at what the Jews actually say about themselves
You deny it - mock it - says it is too Jewish - demand that it is all error
R" I am most happy to view Hebrew Scripture and the Jewish commentary on that Jewish scripture. Present it this way please. Not present the precepts of men, with blah blah. But show me their commentary on their Hebrew, that some inspired Hebrew wrote.

Paul is a Hebrew, look what He wrote.

D" lists verses to show "There is only One True Creator"

Isa 44:6 Thus says Adonai, Israel’s King and his Redeemer, Adonai-Tzva’ot: “I am the first, and the last, and there is no "elohiym" beside Me.

Clearly there are other elohiyms in the universe, but only ONE true elohiym.

Deu 4:35 You were shown, so that you might know that Adonai is"elohiym"—there is no other besides Him.

All your verses show elohiym as the one true elohiym. Now do you care to define elohiym please?

Ps 82:1 Elohiym standeth in the congregation of the mighty; Elohiym judgeth among the Elohiym's.

Who are these other elohiym's? They are shedim, ruled by archon of shedim.


They were one considered sons of elohiym, and allowed to visit God in OT times freely. See Job 1.

These shedim and the archon shedim, called Accuser, naturally oppose God and oppose His salvation to humans.

You do not consider this idea.


D"Your multiple gods and multiple creations is all man-made made up pagan doctrine
R" How many heart cells pump your blood? Compound unity Dave. The community of cells function as one cell, which in science we term an organ. Multiple heart cells is called cancer, a dysfunctional heart.
I agree there is only one true creator, just as there is only one community that pumps your blood in you.


RP" That is my question to you? - Where do shedim come from?
D" DUH – during creation – the dragon – the Beast of revelation just appeared – filly formed and in a plurality
Why does scripture say – just appeared
Because it was not from the Right Hand – the Hand of instruction and salvation
Because the archon are from the Left Hand – the Hand of mystery and judgment
R" Scripture does not say this idea.


RP"Angels can "shamar" and man can "shamar"
D' And Angels can be cherub but men can not be cherubs
R" word games you play Dave. Since when is cherub the same meaning as shamar?

D"Shedim are not angels –
R"Are you sure about that?


D"Then why are all men made sinners by one man
R" because as soon as Adam sinned, the cherub changed our DNA and spoiled the code somewhat, now the mischief made by the mischief maker requires "life for life" penalty, and thus all born with fallen DNA (mischief done to our DNA) will die. Humans had mischief done to our bodies.

D" Why aren’t all cherubs made sinners by the sin of one cherub
Because the cherub when they sinned, sinned in the mind, but nobody changed their DNA or body, so the sinning cherubims could repent and return to God normally, as no mischief happened to their bodies.

D"I have told you before – we can call them Principalities (archon) as Paul does
We can call them Principalities as Luke does (archon)
R The NT uses the term archon as prince or rulers. A functional term describing shedim.

Eph 6:12 For our struggle is not against flesh and blood, but against the rulers,(shedim) against the powers, against the worldly forces of this darkness, and against the spiritual forces of wickedness in the heavenly places.
D" I like it
R" I like this too

D"If there is one error in his writings all of his witting must be error
R" correct, therefore Nachmaodies is not inspired. However one could read his works as a secular authority.

Just as I take on board Gerald Schroeder ideas from a secular view point.

D"But for you – Ezekiel and Luke are perfectly acceptable – even tho they contain error
R" DO they contaiin error? Not according to me. Sure some messages are difficult, but I see no errors.
Your birth of Jesus idea, is a history thing not evaluated by Scripture.

D"Double standard
R" Not really, prove me the errors than.

D"Not satan did not negate God statement
R" That's funny? Can't you read Scripture?

Job 1:9 Then Satan answered the LORD, and said, Doth Job fear God for nought?

Does Job fear GOD for nothing?

Sounds like a negation to me.

First why would a sinner fear God?
Second do sinner really love GOD just for rewards?

Both of these insinuations are false ideas of GOD, hence archon shedim here is opposing GOD directly with false ideas of God's nature.

Notice I use the same term Paul uses shedim, and for ha-satan as Matthew does in Hebrew.


D"Evidently – Hebrew satan was accurate and correct – and simply quoted scripture to God

R First why would a sinner fear God?
Second do sinner really love GOD just for rewards?
Third, why is the hedge to be removed? So the archon shedim can attack once again, that's why. If the shedim can get Job to sin, than the shedim are allowed to reign in their kingdom. God agrees to the archon shedim's challenge to remove the hedge so the shedim can attack Job more, the archon shedim is told not to take Job's life. The archon shedim obeys because it is not considered a powerful elohiym, only a false and thus weaker elohiym under God's judgment. See Psalm 82:1


D"Validated by srcipture itself - and every Jewish and mainstream commentary
R" show me the Jewish commentary on Zec 3 than


D"If you deny there is only One True Creator - which one of your family members is your god?
R" Which of your heart cells is independent Dave? Which cells do the pumping of your blood?

D"Your good angels of beauty and light – turn into biological serpents and live as biological being crawling around on their bellies
R" What's wrong with that? These beautiful cherub angels have sinned and so their beauty faded because God's light is not with them. The angels eat food, ie manna, just as humans do, so the cherub angels are biological like humans are, but also not quite the same, as humans on earth.


D"It is nothing that you do – there is no man-made ritual that you can repeat over and over that will get you into heaven.
All that is required for salvation = belief
R" Great this word belief is one of many words in the faith family of words, amanuah, aman and man

D"YEP – Gen 2:7 – man comes into this world as spirit
Ge 2:7 And the LORD <Y@hovah> God <'elohiym> formed <yatsar> man <'adam> of the dust <`aphar> of <min> the ground <'adamah>, and breathed <naphach> into his nostrils <'aph> the breath <n@shamah> of life <chay>; and man <'adam> became a living <chay> soul <nephesh>.
R" you goofed again Dave, the only word for spirit I see here in Gen 2:7 is nashamah.

Nashamah means to breathe, like breath in and out, also the breathing of man, our character.
Not mention of HS (ruwach) here, though other verses suggest this.

D"Ecc 12:7 Then the dust returns to the ground it came from, and the spirit returns to God who gave it.
Yep – man leaves this world as spirit
It says the ruwach (HS) returns to GOD, not the "nashamah" returns. Man has no spirit that is eternal of his own.

Our nashamah comes when the HS empowers us with living. Living only comes from GOD.

D" What else to you support – all you have done on this forum is elevate your satan to godhood
R" I have tried you to understand the term "archon shedim"
YES – I have two gods and two kings – whats wrong with that? you post this of mine

PS 82:1 “God (elohim) stands in the divine assembly;
he administers judgment in the midst of the gods (elohim).”

It's not rocket science Dave. Ps 82 speaks of other elohiym in judgement.

D"You belong to a religeous cult that requires your satan to be a god - so the Great Controverst between two gods can take place in heaven
I am a Gnostic Christian - Messanic Jew without the heritage
Hebrew satan is an angel of the Lord - in service to the Lord
Hebrew devils = Greek Beast of Revelation - is the origin of all the - serpents / shedim / archon / Jinn / demons / devils and satanas
R" I would say this post, more than any of the others shows you are wrong. Listen to Paul, the Hebrew and how he uses the term shedim from the OT into the NT.

D"How can you possibly believe in your Great Controvesry between two gods in heaven -
R" You use the term "elohiym" and "other false gods -elohiym" Ps 82.

Question for you is, who are the archon shedim and where did they come from? The term archon shedim means prince of the devils. A chief ruler, hence accuser. These creatures are cherubims that sinned.

Shalom

[Dave]

R" I generally do not read context that much, because most of us do not even agree with the word meanings, let alone the meanings of sentences found in other sentences.
Most of us do not consider words have single basic meaning regardless of the sentence it is in.
Some words like polysemy have single basic meanings too, but the meaning is found by the sentence it is in.
Correct – you avoid spelling – you do not consider syntax – you do not consider context – or grammar
You do not translate – you pluck words out and play games with them

For example in Hebrew the word for satan verb or noun, is written as STN, three letter root.

If this was translated by the Greeks, the same word and its meaning must be the same. In Greek the word is satanas. However in Dave's thinking this word suddenly has an entirely different meaning.

1- STN or שָׂטָן is a Hebrew word – it is of Hebrew origin
2- Σατανᾶς – is a Chaldean word – it is Chaldee origin

These words are homonyms – and your word games are kicking your ass
Because you refuse to see tham as having different origins

What are 10 examples of homonyms?
words that sound alike but have different meanings
Cache – Cash: (French – English)
Scents – Sense: (Middle English and old French)
Chile – Chili: (South American country, probably named from a local native word – Spanish red pepper)
Choir – Quire: (English – French)
Site – Sight: (old English – Greek)
Facts- Fax: (Latin - 1940s: English abbreviation of facsimile.)
Finnish – Finish (a country - Swedish, where the words finlandi meant neighbor – English)

All of these words sound alike – but are not spelled the same because they have different origins and mean completely different things

In your thinking the NT word satanas means the Hebrew word shedim, the devils
Correct – The Beast is that old serpent – and we called them devils and satanas

mentioned only once in the NT according to you. I find that rather strange.
What are you talking about – why do you make up stories – and present them as facts

G4567 – 36 matches in 33 verses
G1228 – 38 matches in 36 verses
G1404 – 13 matches in 12 verses
G3789 - 14 matches in 14 verses – although all not on opic – rober method mandates they all men the same as Rev 12:9
Do for get his messengers – G32 - ἄγγελος - a messenger;
Do not forget that Paul and Luke call them - G746 - ἀρχή - … magistrate, power, principality, ruler.

We know from certainty Matthew was Hebrew once and was translated in Greek.
Do not disagree – makes sense – Matthew wrote to the Hebrews therefore Hebrew makes sense
If the Hebrew common man spoke Hebrew – it was a banned language for almost 100 years

Mt 4:10 Then saith Jesus unto him, Get thee hence, Satan: for it is written, Thou shalt worship the Lord thy God, and him only shalt thou serve.

Now since Matthew was written in Hebrew, this word Satanas in Greek, has to be ha-satan in Hebrew.
It's a no brainer Dave, but you ignore every discussion I have with you.

Mat 4:10 τότε λέγει αὐτῷ ὁ ᾿Ιησοῦς· ὕπαγε, Σατανᾶ· γέγραπται γάρ, Κύριον τὸν Θεόν σου προσκυνήσεις καὶ αὐτῷ μόνῳ λατρεύσεις.

The only real evidence we have it the scripture – it says – satanas

Now suddenly that makes every verse that uses STN a creature also called shedim or devil.
I would agree with that G4567 Σατανᾶς of Chaldee origin = King Solomon’s shedim

I quote"
What does the Bible say about shedim?
Paul uses the word daimonion, one of the words used frequently in the New Testament for evil spiritual beings, to translate shedim in Deuteronomy 32:17. Paul knew his Hebrew Bible and didn’t deny the reality of the shedim, who are elohim.
YEP – Paul was a Hebrew with Jewish Theology

Scholars of Paul’s first letter to the Corinthians know that in the apostle’s warning to not fellowship with demons (1 Cor. 10:20), Paul’s comments follow the history of the Israelites described in Deuteronomy 32. He warns believers against fellowship with demons on the basis of Israel’s failure in worshiping other gods. Paul uses the word daimonion, one of the words used frequently in the New Testament for evil spiritual beings, to translate shedim in Deuteronomy 32:17. Paul knew his Hebrew Bible and didn’t deny the reality of the shedim, who are elohim.

With respect to Scripture, one need look no further than Deuteronomy 32:17:

“They [the Israelites] sacrificed to demons [shedim], not God [eloah], to gods [elohim] whom they had not known.”

The verse explicitly calls the elohim
YES – agreed – heavenly beings acting as ‘other gods’ = absolutley
As in bane elohiym

that the Israelites perversely worshiped demons (shedim). This rarely used term (Deut. 32:17; Psa. 106:37) comes from the Akkadian shedu. In the ancient Near East, the term shedu was neutral; it could speak of a good or malevolent spirit being.

Good and bad Jinn = wish granters (genies) and poltergeist
Good Jinn help you curse your enemy and gain fortune – SELF indulgers
Bad Jinn attack you - as in helping your enemy attack you
These shedim are considered in Scritpure as elohiym, as Dave points out "false gods".
Consider the term Paul uses in the NT,

1Co 10:20 But I say, that the things which the Gentiles sacrifice, they sacrifice to devils, and not to God: and I would not that ye should have fellowship with devils.

There are 52 verses in the NT that use the term "shedim".
but earlier you said
R “In your thinking the NT word satanas means the Hebrew word shedim, the devils mentioned only once in the NT according to you. I find that rather strange.
REPEAT - WHAT

Mt 9:34 But the Pharisees said, He casteth out devils through the prince of the devils.
Notice the chief of shedim is termed "archon".
OK
Not as Dave says there are many archons, the chief shedim is term "archon shedim".
This is the "archon shedim" that Jesus came to cast out from the earth.
Consused - you deny there are multiple demons/shedim/archon - hoe do you explain away the legion?

Joh 12:31 Now is the judgment of this world: now shall the prince of this world be cast out.
Same term used "archon shedim" is to be cast out.
Agreed – Christ is superior to the dominion of the archon – the ‘sar’ of earth

Mt 12:24 But when the Pharisees heard it, they said, This fellow doth not cast out devils, but by Beelzebub the prince of the devils.
Jews consider "by Beelzebub the prince of the devils." This is Beelzebub is the archon shedim.
Absolutely correct – 100% King Solomon

Mt 12:24 But when the Pharisees heard it, they said, This fellow doth not cast out devils, but by Beelzebub the prince of the devils.
25 And Jesus knew their thoughts, and said unto them, Every kingdom divided against itself is brought to desolation; and every city or house divided against itself shall not stand: 26 And if Satan cast out Satan, he is divided against himself; how shall then his kingdom stand? 27 And if I by Beelzebub cast out devils, by whom do your children cast them out? therefore they shall be your judges. 28 But if I cast out devils by the Spirit of God, then the kingdom of God is come unto you

This passage is very significant.
if Beelzebub is the chief of the archon/shedim – can’t Beelzebub command them?

Jeff Benner consider 758 archon as many of possible Hebrew.
sar = prince is one example I choose among his choices.
Correct – I agree

IN my opinion, the ha-satan is the prince of shedim, known to Jews as Beelzebub, or one of ha-satan's generals. The rest of the shedim are under the direct control of the ha-satan.

This is a completely different view than Dave's.
Correct – because scripture says
The Beast of Revelation is the prince of shedim, known to Jews as Beelzebub, or one of the Beast’s generals. The rest of the shedim are under the direct control of the Beast – then the generals as in a army

D" lists verses to show "There is only One True Creator"
All your verses show elohiym as the one true elohiym. Now do you care to define elohiym please?
Elohiym is plural for strong authority(s)
El = mac2
El = Christ the image of El – and the Spirit of El
El = a plurality
E = mc2 = a Trinity

You cannot take the E out of the m – m = E/c2
You cannot take the E out of the c2 – c2 = E/m
But E can stand alone as a singularity

It is the mainstream Christian Trinity – one God 3 persons


Ps 82:1 Elohiym standeth in the congregation of the mighty; Elohiym judgeth among the Elohiym's.
Psa 82:1 A psalm of Asaph. God takes His stand in the assembly of God. He judges among the ‘gods’:
YES Absolutely

Who are these other elohiym's? They are shedim, ruled by archon of shedim.
Jos 22:22 “God of gods is Adonai! God of gods is Adonai! He knows, and may Israel itself know!
Jos 22:22 The LORD God of gods, the LORD God of gods, he knoweth, and Israel he shall know;

Jdg 2:1 And an angel of the LORD came up from Gilgal to Bochim, and said, I made you to go up out of Egypt, and have brought you unto the land which I sware unto your fathers; and I said, I will never break my covenant with you.
Jdg 2:2 And ye shall make no league with the inhabitants of this land; ye shall throw down their altars: but ye have not obeyed my voice: why have ye done this?
Jdg 2:3 Wherefore I also said, I will not drive them out from before you; but they shall be as thorns in your sides, and their gods shall be a snare unto you.

These shedim and the archon shedim, called Accuser, naturally oppose God and oppose His salvation to humans.
You do not consider this idea.
You were going so well – then go complete Roman – in all of these examples you are discussing the Baest of revelation / devils / and agl/NT satanas

Then you apply your doctrine to alter it all into your Roman Fallen angel view

D"But for you – Ezekiel and Luke are perfectly acceptable – even tho they contain error
R" DO they contaiin error? Not according to me. Sure some messages are difficult, but I see no errors.
D"Double standard
R" Not really, prove me the errors than
I have fully presented the argument – for you just to deny the evidence – close your eyes – abandon your absolute rules and guidelines
And you fall back on – well it was good enough for Rome then its OK

Your birth of Jesus idea, is a history thing not evaluated by Scripture.
Either King Herod was alive or he was dead – it cannot be both

D"Validated by srcipture itself - and every Jewish and mainstream commentary
R" show me the Jewish commentary on Zec 3 than
I have more than once – you just reject it because it too Jewish or too secular
Are you unable to do your own research - college grad - teacher - must be so interested

D"Your good angels of beauty and light – turn into biological serpents and live as biological being crawling around on their bellies
R" What's wrong with that?
There is no such thing as evolution!

[Deleted]

D"1- STN or שָׂטָן is a Hebrew word – it is of Hebrew origin
2- Σατανᾶς – is a Chaldean word – it is Chaldee origin

These words are homonyms – and your word games are kicking your ass
Because you refuse to see tham as having different origins

R" origins have nothing to do with translations of words.

Greek 4566

1 verse of

2Co 12:7 ...there was given <didomi> to me <moi> a thorn <skolops> in the flesh <sarx>, the messenger <aggelos> of Satan <Satan> to <hina> buffet <kolaphizo> me <me>,

Greek 4567

33 verses of

Mt 4:10 Then <tote> saith <lego> Jesus <Iesous> unto him <autos>, Get thee hence <hupago>, Satan <Satanas>:

As an example.

RP "We know from certainty Matthew was Hebrew once and was translated in Greek.

D" Do not disagree –

R consider this scholar

WastheNewTestamentReallyWritteninGreek1a
by
Was the New Testament Really
Written in Greek?

A Concise Compendium of the Many Internal and External Evidences of
Aramaic Peshitta Primacy

by Compiled by Christopher Lancaster

I suggest you study this carefully.

Scripture tells you anywhere, but you ignore the torah?

Isa 28:11 For with stammering lips and another tongue will he speak to this people.

Paul quotes this verse about speaking in new tongues.

-------------------------
Lu 24:27 And <kai> beginning <archomai> at <apo> Moses <Moseus> and <kai> <apo> all <pas> the prophets <prophetes>, he expounded <diermeneuo> unto them <autos> in <en> all <pas> the scriptures <graphe> the things concerning <peri> himself <heautou>.

Jesus translates the Hebrew into Greek and Hebrew speaking walkers


Ac 9:36 ¶ Now <de> there was <en> at <en> Joppa <Ioppe> a certain <tis> disciple <mathetria> named <onoma> Tabitha <Tabitha>, which <hos> by interpretation <diermeneuo> is called <lego> Dorcas <Dorkas>: this woman <houtos> <autos> was <en> full <pleres> of good <agathos> works <ergon> and <kai> almsdeeds <eleemosune> which <hos> she did <poieo>. {Dorcas: or, Doe, or, Roe}

A greek translated, translated to mean Dorcas, a Hebrew word?



1Co 12:30 Have <me> <echo> all <pas> the gifts <charisma> of healing <iama>? do all <pas> speak <me> <laleo> with tongues <glossa>? do <me> all <pas> interpret <diermeneuo>?

Translate, the ability to make different words meaning know to you, interpret.


1Co 14:5 <de> I would <thelo> that ye <humas> all <pas> spake <laleo> with tongues <glossa>, but <de> rather <mallon> that <hina> ye prophesied <propheteuo>: for <gar> greater <meizon> is he that prophesieth <propheteuo> than <e> he that speaketh <laleo> with tongues <glossa>, except <ektos> <ei me> he interpret <diermeneuo>, that <hina> the church <ekklesia> may receive <lambano> edifying <oikodome>.

Translate



1Co 14:13 Wherefore <dioper> let him that speaketh <laleo> in an unknown tongue <glossa> pray <proseuchomai> that <hina> he may interpret <diermeneuo>.

UNknown language requires one to translate


1Co 14:27 If <eite> any man <tis> speak <laleo> in an unknown tongue <glossa>, let it be by <kata> two <duo>, or <e> at the most <pleistos> by three <treis>, and <kai> that by <ana> course <meros>; and <kai> let <diermeneuo> one <heis> interpret <diermeneuo>. {two...: by two or three sentences separately}

(KJV)

Again the idea to translate


-----------------------

D" The only real evidence we have it the scripture – it says – satanas
R" Its a translation of Hebrew into Greek, the details to not matter, what would be the Hebrew equivalent?

Certainly not SHAD or shedim, but Satan. Its a no brainer Dave.

Still waiting for your scholar to say satanas is not a Hebrew word satan? No body on the Internet agrees with you. 

D"I would agree with that G4567 Σατανᾶς of Chaldee origin = King Solomon’s shedim
R" Wrong again.

RP"Scholars of Paul’s first letter to the Corinthians know that in the apostle’s warning to not fellowship with demons (1 Cor. 10:20),
1Co 10:21 ...of devils <daimonion>. Greek 1140 is the Hebrew word for SHAD/shedim + other related Greek words


D"Correct – because scripture says
The Beast of Revelation is the prince of shedim, known to Jews as Beelzebub, or one of the Beast’s generals. The rest of the shedim are under the direct control of the Beast – then the generals as in a army
R" now all we have to do is get to yoy to realize the archon shedim is also termed as opposer ha-satan, but you still cling to your Greek term satanas being different to Hebrew term satan.


D"I have fully presented the argument
R" You haven't presented anything. Only historical accounts.

DP"Your good angels of beauty and light – turn into biological serpents and live as biological being crawling around on their bellies
RP" What's wrong with that?
D" There is no such thing as evolution!
R" Are you trying to make me see the angels changed into literal snakes? what a joke...

The opposer chose to speak via the flying serpent, whom God cursed into a snake. My tales with PNG black magic is the SHAD can enter and possess any creature they like, including humans.

There is no evolution here Dave, just hypnotic or deception.

Shalom

[Dave]

D"1- STN or שָׂטָן is a Hebrew word – it is of Hebrew origin
2- Σατανᾶς – is a Chaldean word – it is Chaldee origin
These words are homonyms – and your word games are kicking your ass
Because you refuse to see them as having different origins

R" origins have nothing to do with translations of words.

Etymology is the study of the origins of words.

Why is it important to know the origin of words?
Knowing the etymology of words gives you a great advantage in figuring out their most effective use. Understanding the original meaning of a word as well as how it's been used in both the past and present can increase your comprehension of its nuances and connotation.

homonym
two or more words having the same spelling or pronunciation but different meanings and origins.

Cache – Cash: (French – English)
Scents – Sense: (Middle English and old French)
Chile – Chili: (South American country, probably named from a local native word – Spanish red pepper)
Choir – Quire: (English – French)
Site – Sight: (old English – Greek)
Facts- Fax: (Latin - 1940s: English abbreviation of facsimile.)
Finnish – Finish (a country - Swedish, where the words finlandi meant neighbor – English)

R" origins have nothing to do with translations of words.

Please demonstrate how - Cache – Cash - mean the same thing
Please demonstrate how - Scents – Sense - mean the same thing
Please demonstrate how - Chile – Chili - mean the same thing
Please demonstrate how - Site – Sight: - mean the same thing
Please demonstrate how - Finnish – Finish - mean the same thing

All of these word sound alike – yet have completely different meanings because of their origins

STN or שָׂטָן is a Hebrew word – it is of Hebrew origin
Σατανᾶς – is a Chaldean word – it is Chaldee origin

These words sound alike - yet have completely different meanings because of their origins

Greek 4566 - 1 verse in the agl/NT
2Co 12:7 And lest I should be exalted above measure through the abundance of the revelations, there was given to me a thorn in the flesh, the messenger of Satan to buffet me, lest I should be exalted above measure.

G4566 - Σατᾶν – sat-an - Of Hebrew origin [H7854]; Satan,
Correct - Hebrew satan is only mentioned once in the agl/NT – the prosecutor send a reminder of the error of pride
YES – Could Not Agree more

Greek 4567 33 verses in the agl/NT

G4567 - Σατανᾶς – satanas - Of Chaldee origin- the accuser, that is, the devil: - satan
Correct – Could Not Agree more

homonym
two or more words having the same spelling or pronunciation but different meanings and origins.
these word sound alike – yet have completely different meanings because of their origins

Rev 12:9 And the great dragon was cast out, that old serpent, called the Devil, and satanas (G4567), which deceiveth the whole world: he was cast out into the earth, and his angels were cast out with him

Scripture identifies G4567 satanas as the Beast – the ancient serpent – that we also call devils

Mat 4:10 Then saith Jesus unto him, Get thee hence, satanas (G4567): for it is written, Thou shalt worship the Lord thy God, and him only shalt thou serve.

RP "We know from certainty Matthew was Hebrew once and was translated in Greek.
D" Do not disagree –
And it came out as satanas – the Beast – that ancient serpent – that we also call devils

-------------------------
Still waiting for your scholar to say satanas is not a Hebrew word
No body on the Internet agrees with you.

G4566 - Σατᾶν – Satan - Of Hebrew origin
G4567 - Σατανᾶς – Satanas - Of Chaldee origin

Two different words – spelled differently with different origins
I am sorry - that your are not able to undestand a dictionary
I have stopped taking you serious - babble away

Feb 15, 2022 17:42:48 GMT -5 Dave said:

D"But for you – Ezekiel and Luke are perfectly acceptable – even tho they contain error
R" DO they contaiin error? Not according to me. Sure some messages are difficult, but I see no errors.
D"Double standard
R" Not really, prove me the errors than
I have fully presented the argument – for you just to deny the evidence – close your eyes – abandon your absolute rules and guidelines
And you fall back on – well it was good enough for Rome then its OK

D"I have fully presented the argument
R" You haven't presented anything. Only historical accounts.

www.thetorah.com/article/the-discrepancies-between-the-sacrifices-in-ezekiel-and-the-torah
The Discrepancies Between the Sacrifices in Ezekiel and the Torah
The laws of holiday sacrifices in Ezekiel 45–46 contradict the laws in Numbers 28–29. The problems are so significant that some Talmudic sages thought it would be best to withdraw (לגנוז) the book of Ezekiel. This piece lays out the discrepancies in detail,

Robert – you have a problem with the truth - Christian

DP"Your good angels of beauty and light – turn into biological serpents and live as biological being crawling around on their bellies
RP" What's wrong with that?
D" There is no such thing as evolution!
R" Are you trying to make me see the angels changed into literal snakes? what a joke...

Gen 3:1 But the serpent was shrewder than any animal of the field that Adonai Elohim made.
Gen 3:14 Adonai Elohim said to the serpent, “Because you did this, Cursed are you above all the livestock and above every animal of the field. On your belly will you go, and dust will you eat all the days of your life.

Why do you call the word of God a joke?

[Deleted]

D"Two different words – spelled differently with different origins
I am sorry - that your are not able to undestand a dictionary
I have stopped taking you serious - babble away

R" I asked you for a scholar study of why you see Satanas different to Satan, if the Greek is a translation of the Hebrew, the root word has to have come from Hebrew originally, not Greek.

You no longer wish to show me this study, and you consider me babbling away.

Your theory has no merit because nobody agrees with you.



Shalom

[Dave]

D"Two different words – spelled differently with different origins
I am sorry - that your are not able to undestand a dictionary

R" I asked you for a scholar study of why you see Satanas different to Satan, if the Greek is a translation of the Hebrew, the root word has to have come from Hebrew originally, not Greek.

G4566 - Σατᾶν – Satan - Of Hebrew origin [H7854]; Satan
This is a transliteration of your Hebrew satan
You correctly say it is used only once in the agl/NT

2Co 12:7 even in the extraordinary quality of the revelations. So that I would not exalt myself, a thorn in the flesh was given to me—a a messenger of satan to torment me, so I would not exalt myself.

The messenger is a reminder to be humble – don’t end up lie the King of Tyre

It is also used only once on the (LXX)

1Ki 11:14 Then Adonai raised up an adversary to Solomon, Hadad the Edomite, of the royal line in Edom.

Who is this adversary? There are 3 actually

Adam Clark 1 Kings 11:14
The Lord stirred up an adversary - A satan, שטן. When he sent to Hiram to assist him in building the temple of the Lord, he could say, There was no satan, see 1Ki_5:4;

The Lord sent Hebrew satan to help build a temple

1Ki 5:4 But now the LORD my God hath given me rest on every side, so that there is neither adversary nor evil occurrent.

HEDGE – no satan – no ra
King Solomon even said he used/commanded the shedim to lay the foundation stones of the temple

Adam Clark 1 Kings 5:4
There is neither adversary - אין שטן eyn satan, there is no satan - no opposer, nor any kind of evil; all is peace and quiet, both without and within. God has given me this quiet that I may build his temple.

Adam Clark 1 Kings 11:14 - cont
but now that he had turned away from God, three satans rise up against him at once, Hadad, Rezon, and Jeroboam.

The 3 Hebrew satans of 1 Kings 11:14 = man – man and man = WORLD – Gen 3

You no longer wish to show me this study, and you consider me babbling away.
I present you with the evidence – you pretend you cannot read
Or you to twist other peoples words to fit your doctrine

I wanted to ask Jews where the SHAD come from.
G4567 - Σατανᾶς – Satanas - Of Chaldee origin
And the answer is – wait for it

Feb 15, 2022 2:03:25 GMT -5 Dave said:

(google) origin of the shedim
About 168,000 results (0.48 seconds)
Although the word is traditionally derived from the root ŠWD (Hebrew: שוד shûd) that conveys the meaning of "acting with violence" or "laying waste," it was possibly a loan-word from Akkadian in which the word shedu referred to a spirit which could be either protective or malevolent.

a loan-word from Akkadian in which the word shedu referred to a spirit which could be either protective or malevolent.
It is of Chaldean origin – adopted into Judaism

Shedim - Wikipediahttps://en.wikipedia.org › wiki › Shedim
Shedim - The Jewish Chroniclehttps://www.thejc.com › jewish-words › shedim-1
Mar 6, 2009 — In the Bible, shedim means foreign gods (eg Deuteronomy 32:17.) The word is related to the Akkadian sedu, meaning demon.

foreign gods = ‘other-gods’
the Akkadian sedu, meaning demon. = It is of Chaldean origin – adopted into Judaism

Why is it not of Hebrew origin?
Answer – they are from the 99% - and at the time of Moses that was Chaldea

Rev 12:9 And the great dragon was thrown down—the ancient serpent, called the devil and satan, who deceives the whole world.

G4567 - Σατανᾶς – Satanas - Of Chaldee origin
The root of this word comes for Chaldea

Satanail is the leader of the bane elohiym at Mount Hermon in the 2nd Book of Enoch (Secrets of Enoch – aka Slavic Enoch)

1st Book of Enoch says Azazel is the leader of the bane elohiym at Mount Hermon (Book of Enoch)

Leviticus 16:6–10
Aaron shall offer the bull as a sin offering for himself, and shall make atonement for himself and for his house. He shall take the two goats and set them before the Lord at the entrance of the tent of meeting; and Aaron shall cast lots on the two goats, one lot for the Lord and the other lot for Azazel. Aaron shall present the goat on which the lot fell for the Lord, and offer it as a sin offering; but the goat on which the lot fell for Azazel shall be presented alive before the Lord to make atonement over it, that it may be sent away into the wilderness to Azazel.

Azazel is the ruler / archon / governor of the wilderness – the cold hard WORLD

Your theory has no merit because nobody agrees with you.
The entire history and culture of Judaism agrees with me – because I agree with them
The disciples – of Jesus Christ – James, John, Paul, Peter, Phillip and Thomas agree with me

In fact all of the authors of the agl/NT agree with me

They had two different words at their disposal G4566 Hebrew satan and G4567 Chaldean satanas
Which one did they say was the serpent in the garden?

Rev 12:9 and the great dragon was cast forth—the old serpent, who is called 'Devil,' and 'the (G4567 sanatnas) , who is leading astray the whole world

In fact all of the authors of the agl/NT agree with me
Which one did they write about in the agl/NT or the (NHL)?

I am a follower of Jesus Christ and his disciples
Which one did they say was the serpent in the garden?
Which one do they say is our real struggle?

Your theory has no merit because nobody agrees with you.
Sorry Robert – the only people who do not agree are post Roman Christians who have been taught Catholic satanology – you and your Ellen White are perfect examples
God is not absolute
God is not the One True Creator
God lost control of his creation to an angel
Now God must alter His Plan’s against His Will
OH – and even angels can fall from God Grace – so there is no security in salvation – you must do things daily to maintain your salvation

And do not forget – man has no spirit – and the promise of eternal life is a live
You never existed until you were procreated – then die to the grave no spirit – then reborn / resurrected for some to die yet again

Robert stands against everything Christian

[Deleted]

D"The entire history and culture of Judaism agrees with me – because I agree with them

R" Where have I heard that saying before?

I read from your Jewish writings that Adam when he sinned went into limbo for 125 years alone without Eve, and the "??" came unto him to have "??" with Adam, creating all these "shedim". Not wonder I do not find such writings inspired, and you believe in all this stuff?

You stick to your Jewish writings and your Gnostic writings, I will stick with the torah that GOD preserved for the reformation pioneers. These reformers were predicted to restore the sanctuary after 1844, and set the truth correct again. Maybe not all men had all the truth, but certainly enough for all humans to know salvation, to be plucked as firebrands from the fire.

Men like Luther, Huss, Spurgeon, Wyclif , Tyndale, and later of course Ellen White, these early pioneers had the inspired messages of God, and demonstrate a truth worth dying for.

Robert will stand with our Seventh Day keeping pioneers of the reformation.

[Dave]

Just look at how serious you are

I read from your Jewish writings that Adam when he sinned went into limbo for 125 years alone without Eve, and the "??" came unto him to have "??" with Adam, creating all these "shedim". Not wonder I do not find such writings inspired, and you believe in all this stuff?

You deliberately go to something the Jews themselves call a Legend – and criticize it as inspired scripture

You stick to your Jewish writings and your Gnostic writings,
Correct Judaism is the foundation of Judeo-Christian theology – not Rome

Jesus said
Mat 5:17 “Do not think that I came to abolish the Torah or the Prophets! I did not come to abolish, but to fulfill.
Mat 5:18 Amen, I tell you, until heaven and earth pass away, not the smallest letter or serif shall ever pass away from the Torah until all things come to pass.

The authors of my Gnostic writing are from James, John, Paul, Peter, Phillip, and Thomas – men who actually walked and talked with Jesus Christ both before and after the resurrection
The very same authors of the agl/NT

I will stick with the torah that Rome preserved
Men like Luther, Huss, Spurgeon, Wyclif , Tyndale, and later of course Ellen White, these early pioneers had the inspired messages of God, and demonstrate a truth worth dying for.
All post Roman Fallen Angel theology

Robert will stand with our Seventh Day keeping pioneers of the reformation.
Are you willing to defend the words of your own prophets that supersedes the Gospel Jesus Christ?
Are you willing to prove there is no error in the Book of Ezekiel
Are you willing to admit that you argument – one error and all the text is error is an attitude – and an attitude you apply as a double standard
Are you willing to admit that you are unwilling to look at the discussion - honestly?

[Deleted]

www.thetorah.com/article/the-discrepancies-between-the-sacrifices-in-ezekiel-and-the-torah

The Discrepancies Between the Sacrifices in Ezekiel and the Torah

The laws of holiday sacrifices in Ezekiel 45–46 contradict the laws in Numbers 28–29. The problems are so significant that some Talmudic sages thought it would be best to withdraw (לגנוז) the book of Ezekiel. This piece lays out the discrepancies in detail, surveys some traditional and modern answers, and ends with my own thoughts about why Ezekiel’s system is so different.[1]
by Dr.Tova Ganzel


Contradictions Between Ezekiel and the Torah

Prophetic books are mostly comprised of words of rebuke and consolation; Ezekiel is the only prophet whose prophecies contain laws for the people. Numerous differences exist between these laws, found in Ezekiel 40–48, and those in the Torah. These contradictions created a predicament expressed by the Amoraim (b. Menahot 45a):[2]

אמר רב יהודה אמר רב: זכור אותו האיש לטוב וחנינא בן חזקיה שמו שאלמלא הוא נגנז ספר יחזקאל שהיו דבריו סותרין דברי תורה. מה עשה? העלה שלש מאות גרבי שמן וישב בעלייה ודרשו. R. Judah said in the name of Rav: “Remember a certain man for good—Hanina son of Hizkiah is his name—for were it not for him, the book of Ezekiel would have been withdrawn, since its words contradict the words of the Torah. What did he do? He took three hundred barrels of oil and stayed in the upper chamber and expounded it.
These differences are in various sections of the final unit of Ezekiel, but I will focus on the contradictions between the laws of the required holiday offerings in the Torah (Num 28–29) and their counterpart in Ezekiel chs. 45–46, part of which serves as the haftarah of Shabbat Hachodesh.

Comparing the Offerings in Ezekiel to Those in Numbers
The Nasi in Ezekiel’s Thinking
Before discussing the offerings themselves, we need to say a bit about the nasi (prince) of Israel and his function in Ezekiel’s future Temple. The nasi is the governmental head of Israel, likely a reference to the Davidic king. He is envisioned as taking an active role in the sacrificial system, and is referred to as the one who will bring many of the offerings, including the holiday offerings we will discuss below.

יחזקאל מה:יז וְעַֽל הַנָּשִׂ֣יא יִהְיֶ֗ה הָעוֹל֣וֹת וְהַמִּנְחָה֘ וְהַנֵּסֶךְ֒ בַּחַגִּ֤ים וּבֶחֳדָשִׁים֙ וּבַשַּׁבָּת֔וֹת בְּכָֽל מוֹעֲדֵ֖י בֵּ֣ית יִשְׂרָאֵ֑ל הֽוּא יַעֲשֶׂ֞ה אֶת הַחַטָּ֣את וְאֶת הַמִּנְחָ֗ה וְאֶת הָֽעוֹלָה֙ וְאֶת הַשְּׁלָמִ֔ים לְכַפֵּ֖ר בְּעַ֥ד בֵּֽית יִשְׂרָאֵֽל: Ezek 45:17 But the burnt offerings, the meal offerings, and the libations on festivals, new moons, sabbaths—all fixed occasions—of the House of Israel shall be the obligation of the prince; he shall provide the sin offerings, the meal offerings, the burnt offerings, and the offerings of well-being, to make expiation for the House of Israel.
Different Offerings: Pesach and Sukkot
Here is an overview of the differences between Ezekiel and Numbers regarding the holiday sacrifices:



Missing Holidays: Shavuot, Yom Teruah, Yom HaKippurim, Shemini of Sukkot
The book of Numbers also prescribes offerings for the Festival of Firstfruits (Shavuot), the Day of Blasts (later called Rosh Hashanah), the tenth day of the seventh month (Yom Kippur), and the Eighth Day festival (Shemini Atzeret). Ezekiel never mentions these one-day festivals and certainly does not list any offerings related to them.[3] It is possible that Ezekiel does not discuss these festivals because he is not making any changes to their rites. Alternatively, the omission may indicate that these festivals will not be observed in the future temple.[4]

Offerings for Shabbat and Rosh Chodesh
The remainder of the Haftarah deals with offerings for Shabbat and Rosh Chodesh (which is why it is read on Shabbat Hachodesh). Here as well, there are differences between Ezekiel and Numbers.[5]
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
R" It's a difficult and complex study

Ezekiel 45, 44 what is all this about?

What is Ezekiel 40 all about? Seems like God is giving a vision to Ezekiel about a temple in heaven? With different offerings? Not sure...?

---------------------------------------------

D"You deliberately go to something the Jews themselves call a Legend – and criticize it as inspired scripture
R" you posted to me as fact did you not? Lilith thing, etc, etc. Why would Jews preserve legends?

D"Are you willing to prove there is no error in the Book of Ezekiel
R" I can't find any, except a prophecy about a future temple, I don't understand.... maybe the prophecy was conditional?

D"Are you willing to admit that you are unwilling to look at the discussion - honestly?
R" I could say that about you? spiritualsprings.org/ss-1061.htm

A study of mine proving that EGW is a Hebrew BIble translator or expounder, same idea?
But you haven't looked at my study, only critics of the writings of Ellen White, based on spurious theories of the past. Science cannot evaluate the past very well, but science can evaluate the present, the actual writings of words Ellen White wrote. Hence I study this.

You look for errors in traditions of Jews in cultural sin-offerings, but instead we should study the words of the torah and how the words are preserved as true messages. Cultural understanding is hard to fathom.

Word meanings and word studies are more defined and can be evaluated easily.

For example you cite:

Zec 14:19 This shall be the punishment of Egypt, and the punishment of all nations that come not up to keep the feast of tabernacles.

I find this is a translation error, yes, but not a problem with the Hebrew having errors.

Zec 14:19 The sin-offering of Egypt, and the sin-offering of all nations that come not up to keep the feast of tabernacles.

Sometimes understanding God's messages is hard.

2Ti 3:16 All <pas> scripture <graphe> is given by inspiration of God <theopneustos>,
All writings are elohiym-breathed.

1Ti 5:18 For <gar> the scripture <graphe> saith <lego>, Thou shalt <phimoo> not <ou> muzzle <phimoo> the ox <bous> that treadeth out the corn <aloao>. And <kai>, The labourer <ergates> is worthy <axios> of his <autos> reward <misthos>.

Why does the graphe refer to torah, but its not translated as nomos?

Jas 2:8 ¶ If <ei> <mentoi> ye fulfil <teleo> the royal <basilikos> law <nomos> according to <kata> the scripture <graphe>, Thou shalt love <agapao> thy <sou> neighbour <plesion> as <hos> thyself <seautou>, ye do <poieo> well <kalos>:


Why does James make royal torah a part of the graphe?

rk#:1124  / graf-ay (noun): Scripture Freq:&51
Heb#:3791 כתב / k-tav (noun): Writing—A record of a
story, thoughts or instructions inscribed on a variety of
media including stone, papyrus, leather or parchment.

Hebrew 3791: Es 1:22 For he sent letters into all the king's provinces, into every province according to the writing thereof, and to every people after their language, that every man should bear rule in his own house, and that it should be published according to the language of every people.

Kathab refers to any legal writings....not just Scripture?

Da 10:21 But I will shew thee that which is noted in the scripture of truth: and there is none that holdeth with me in these things, but Michael your prince.
"writings of faith" is a better translation.

2Ti 3:16 All <pas> scripture <graphe> is given by inspiration of God <theopneustos>,

All writings are elohiym-breathed. Footnote" Context: scripture writings are God breathed.

I think you make a mountain out of a mole hill sometimes Dave. The torah, the writings, whatever, were ways to reach salvation to ordinary folk, so they can be saved.

D"Are you willing to admit that you argument – one error and all the text is error is an attitude
R" God does not make mistakes, nor should we find errors in his messages or prophets.
You look for ways to discredit God's writings so you can ignore the "cherub that sinned" for example.

You also seem to think we have power over our spirit after we die? direct violation of the torah.

When the Rabbi said the Spirit lives? Which spirit? the ruwach returns to God, not your nashamah?

You also play word games. You see the Hebrew word satan as a good angel doing a bad job, while the Greek word satanas seems to refer to shedim, with no scholar reference as to why?
The Jews have legends about the orgins of the shedim according to you, but no actual proof od where the shedim came from? Only Gnostic writings off a clue? Funny that? But you ignore the Ezekiel "cherub that chata"?

Why do you seek other writings, when the writings we do have explains all my concerns?

But you ignore Ezekiel because it does not fit your view....how sad for you...

SHalom

[Dave]

D"You deliberately go to something the Jews themselves call a Legend – and criticize it as inspired scripture
R" you posted to me as fact did you not?

You asks for the origin stories – I gave you the Islamic version – Torah version agl/NT version – the Gnostic version – and included the Legends of the Jews
You are the word man – when does legend mean fact?
How you stumble over vocabulary is amazing – you are so deep

D"Are you willing to admit that you are unwilling to look at the discussion - honestly?
R" I could say that about you? spiritualsprings.org/ss-1061.htm
A study of mine proving that EGW is a Hebrew BIble translator or expounder, same idea?
But you haven't looked at my study, only critics of the writings of Ellen White, based on spurious theories of the past. Science cannot evaluate the past very well, but science can evaluate the present, the actual writings of words Ellen White wrote. Hence I study this.

Am I am looking at the 55 times she is accused of contradicting scripture
I agree – some of it is spurious
Some of it is to outrageous to ignore
One error and it must all be garbage – that is the Robert rule

2Ti 3:16 All <pas> scripture <graphe> is given by inspiration of God <theopneustos>,
All writings are elohiym-breathed.

G1121 – γράμμα – gramma - From G1125; a writing, that is, a letter, note, epistle, book, etc.; plural learning: - bill, learning, letter, scripture, writing, written.
Gramma – wonder what English word comes for this?

1Ti 5:18 For <gar> the scripture <graphe> saith <lego>, Thou shalt <phimoo> not <ou> muzzle <phimoo> the ox <bous> that treadeth out the corn <aloao>. And <kai>, The labourer <ergates> is worthy <axios> of his <autos> reward <misthos>.

G1124 – γραφή - graphē From G1125; a document, that is, holy Writ (or its contents or a statement in it): - scripture.

G1125 – γράφω - graphō - A primary verb; to “grave”, especially to write; figuratively to describe: - describe, write (-ing, -ten).

Why does the graphe refer to torah, but its not translated as nomos?

1- BECAUSE G1124 refers to a document – any document – all the documents
This is the error of only using Strong’s dictionary – Strong’s is limited to only agl/NT usage

Thayer Definition:
1) to write, with reference to the form of the letters
1a) to delineate (or form) letters on a tablet, parchment, paper, or other material
2) to write, with reference to the contents of the writing
2a) to express in written characters
2b) to commit to writing (things not to be forgotten), write down, record
2c) used of those things which stand written in the sacred books (of the OT)
2d) to write to one, i.e. by writing (in a written epistle) to give information, directions
3) to fill with writing
4) to draw up in writing, compose

2- why didn’t Paul choose the word G1124 instead of G3551
Answer – Paul is correct and understand what he is talking about

G3551 – νόμος - From a primary word νέμω nemō (to parcel out, especially food or grazing to animals); law (through the idea of prescriptive usage),

Jas 2:8 ¶ If <ei> <mentoi> ye fulfil <teleo> the royal <basilikos> law <nomos> according to <kata> the scripture <graphe>, Thou shalt love <agapao> thy <sou> neighbour <plesion> as <hos> thyself <seautou>, ye do <poieo> well <kalos>:

Why does James make royal torah a part of the graphe?

DUH – the Torah is part of the larger whole

Hebrew 3791: Es 1:22 For he sent letters into all the king's provinces, into every province according to the writing thereof, and to every people after their language, that every man should bear rule in his own house, and that it should be published according to the language of every people.

Kathab refers to any legal writings....not just Scripture?
WHAT?

Est 1:22 For he sent letters (H5612) into all the king's provinces, into every province according to the writing thereof, and to every people after their language, that every man should bear rule in his own house, and that it should be published according to the language of every people.

H5612 - סִפְרָה סֵפֶר - sêpher - From H5608; properly writing (the art or a document); by implication a book: - bill, book, evidence, X learn [-ed] (-ing), letter, register, scroll.

Da 10:21 But I will shew thee that which is noted in the scripture of truth: and there is none that holdeth with me in these things, but Michael your prince.
"writings of faith" is a better translation.

H3791 – כָּתָב - kâthâb - From H3789; something written, that is, a writing, record or book: - register, scripture, writing.

OK – here is your unrelated word to (H5612)

2Ti 3:16 All <pas> scripture <graphe> is given by inspiration of God <theopneustos>,
All writings are elohiym-breathed. Footnote" Context: scripture writings are God breathed.
Yes – Correct scripture is inspired
So was Einstein – so was Schroder – so was Newton – so was Weinstein – etc – etc – etc
All gave us great insight (revelation)

The more of Psa 19:2 and Rom 19:1 we uncover supports the Intelligent Design – therefore the Designer

I think you make a mountain out of a mole hill sometimes Dave. The torah, the writings, whatever, were ways to reach salvation to ordinary folk, so they can be saved.
NO ROBERT – the ahl – the Torah was NOT given to teach ways to salvation – WRONG

The Torah was given to God’s Chosen people to
1- set them apart from the 99%
2- to instruct them how to live long and health lives
3- so they could Jer 1:5 to the whole world through their parade
4- all Jews are saved by birth right – all they had to do was obey and Jer 1:5
5- all Jews are saved by birth right – but we must all paid for our deeds performed in the body (2 Cor 5:10)
6- The Torah was given for his chosen people to prepare the world for the Messiah and the Age of the Gentile

When the Rabbi said the Spirit lives? Which spirit? the ruwach returns to God, not your nashamah?
All spirit is alive – God’s Spirit + the spirits we call angels and the spirit we call evil and the spirit we call man

[Deleted]

D"You are the word man – when does legend mean fact?
How you stumble over vocabulary is amazing – you are so deep
R" Sorry Dave

D"Am I am looking at the 55 times she is accused of contradicting scripture
I agree – some of it is spurious
Some of it is to outrageous to ignore
R" Post one of her errors Dave and we will discuss. Just one. In the balance of probabilities, if one error is overturned, than all the others can be as well. Prophets are prophetic for a reason. Not all prophetic messages are easily understood. Ezekiel comes to mind for example.

RP"When the Rabbi said the Spirit lives? Which spirit? the ruwach returns to God, not your nashamah?
D" All spirit is alive – God’s Spirit + the spirits we call angels and the spirit we call evil and the spirit we call man
R" No Dave you are wrong, the nashamah is not alive when the HS is not connected to it,
Our spirit dies when the HS separates herself from us. The power of the Father is thus broken, and our nashamah dies.

Ps 146:4 His breath goeth forth, he returneth to his earth; in that very day his thoughts perish.

(KJV)

When the ruwach (HS) returns, the nashamah thoughts perish that very day.


Ec 8:8 There is no man that hath power over the spirit to retain the spirit; neither hath he power in the day of death:

Man has no power over the HS (ruwach) on the dying of our nashamah

Ro 6:4 Therefore we are buried with him by baptism into death:

(so something has to die, our nashamah does and is renewed by Jesus)



SHalom

PS  DO you have any Jew commenting on why ruwach and nashamah BOTH appear together in the breath of life verses? Not the normal thing Hebrew does. But Hebrew does do this... 

[Dave]

D"You are the word man – when does legend mean fact?
How you stumble over vocabulary is amazing – you are so deep
R" Sorry Dave
You must admit Robert – you do not study at depth – you cling to your failed concepts and have flexible definitions that you bend to fit your doctrine
You must admit Robert – you do not study at depth – Your bias gets in your way – your pre-conceived attitudes clouds your study – you cannot look at the information as an academic
Your absolute judgments have trapped you into a corner - the only way out is for you to admit you may have been in error – and it is hard to admit when you are wrong
Precept upon precept, line upon line – your doctrine does not stand

D"Am I am looking at the 55 times she is accused of contradicting scripture
I agree – some of it is spurious
Some of it is to outrageous to ignore
R" Post one of her errors Dave and we will discuss. Just one. In the balance of probabilities, if one error is overturned, than all the others can be as well. Prophets are prophetic for a reason. Not all prophetic messages are easily understood. Ezekiel comes to mind for example.

Jun 9, 2020 13:41:06 GMT -5 @robertt said:

Isa 8:20 To the law and to the testimony: if they speak not according to this word, it is because there is no light in them.

D"Am I am looking at the 55 times she is accused of contradicting scripture
I agree – some of it is spurious
BUT – she denies that Jesus Christ was God incarnate – major deal breaker

WAS THE MAN JESUS CHRIST ALSO TRULY GOD? - EGW: NO
DID JESUS' HUMANITY AND DIVINITY DIE ON THE CROSS? - EGW: YES
WAS THE ATONEMENT FOR SIN COMPLETED AT THE CR0SS? - EGW: NO

Other questionable teachings – contradictory to scripture
WAS THE PLAN OF SALVATION MADE AFTER THE FALL?
WAS ADAM WITH EVE WHEN SHE WAS TEMPTED IN THE GARDEN?
WAS ADAM DECEIVED BY SATAN?
WHO PLUCKED THE FRUIT?

And her comments on science
CAUSE OF VOLCANIC ERUPTIONS AND EARTHQUAKES

Feb 19, 2022 16:24:12 GMT -5 Dave said:

Nov 12, 2021 13:49:16 GMT -5 Dillon said:

What about the coal layer?
video
Why almost all coal was made at the same time

Nov 12, 2021 17:02:56 GMT -5 @robertt said:

Dillon asks "Why almost all coal was made at the same time?
I will get back to you on this video Dillon.

YES – we await your defense of Ellen White
ponderingconfusion.proboards.com/thread/550/ellen-white-prophet-error
Ellen White - Prophet or Error?

NEXT – the many times Ellen White contradicts herself

RP"When the Rabbi said the Spirit lives? Which spirit? the ruwach returns to God, not your nashamah?
D" All spirit is alive – God’s Spirit + the spirits we call angels and the spirit we call evil and the spirit we call man
DO you have any Jew commenting on why ruwach and nashamah BOTH appear together in the breath of life verses? Not the normal thing Hebrew does. But Hebrew does do this.

Jewish Commentary of Gen 2:7
ponderingconfusion.proboards.com/thread/478/jewish-commentary-gen-2-7

Jan 17, 2021 16:14:43 GMT -5 @robertt said:

I listened from 33 to 40 minutes in.
This borders on the verge of pantheism. We are not a part of GOD, nor do we have "spirits"

Already discussed – you gave it your usual treatment
The video is 45 min long – you listened to 7 minutes of it –
Instead of commenting on the content or his words – you postured and reacted by attacking the source

Rabbi Friedman - The Soul and the Afterlife
ponderingconfusion.proboards.com/thread/442/rabbi-friedman-soul-afterlife

Jun 9, 2020 13:41:06 GMT -5 @robertt said:

This is not what the Hebrew Scriptures show.

You make the claim the Jewish writings are also torah teachings?

Isa 8:20 To the law and to the testimony: if they speak not according to this word, it is because there is no light in them.

Already discussed – you gave it your usual treatment
Instead of commenting on the content or his words – you postured and reacted by attacking the source

[Deleted]

D BUT – she denies that Jesus Christ was God incarnate – major deal breaker

R You are claiming Dave that the Father died on the Cross? Some part of the Father died, the biological body died only, so the Father didn't really die?

Than you say the Father praying to the Father seems OK to you?

You also say the Father can show love by himself?

Adam got lonely seeing the creatures had two personalities of loving within each kind, but Adam had no helpmate of love. All he had was self based love, whatever you call it, Adam got lonely....

SO GOD, who is not lonely, and made mankind in OUR image, built from within Adam a helpmate who was a clone of Adam, ie same BEING, but of a different loving personality.

GOD is like this. You say three expressions, I say three personalities of love.
We both lay claim to ONE BEING.

You say a marriage is comprised of two beings. I would say NO.
That is a selfish fallen definition of marriage.

Jesus is of the same divine nature as the Father, equal in all things except rank.


The Home-Head strongly presses actively (something) important;
the Home-Head strongs (from) "family power";
strongly towards this important mark, the divine being presses the flow actively the flow,
over the nations strong toward this important mark, 
Behold the strong Head travels. 

Footnotes"  Behold the strong Head travels" is a picture of our earth, was not pressed or formed but already there in space.

"over the nations strong toward this important mark" Over the nations , suggest other beings already on earth, towards this important mark.

"the divine being presses the flow actively the flow" a picture of heaven, not just earth's atmosphere, but all the ether is pressed and ordered in space.

(from) "family power"; The "Family power" a considered a word, from the letters 
"The strong authority Behold the Divine with active hands flow"
"The word family is a secular term, like corporate or government, no reference to born, as with earthly biological families"

the Home-Head strongs, the verb strongs, the ability to engineer, or fatten, or fill, or order

The Home-Head, a simile of the Son in a Home and a simile of the SEED in the Head of wheat. "From BN, (son) the "home over the nations" we can think of the Saviour continuing the home of GOD over the nations.


Notice the Ancient Hebrew scripture with footnotes.

In the beginning of time, Adam spoke picture words with sounds, only later they became words, and later again with slang into other idioms and word meanings.

The words of Moses torah would have been in Ancient Hebrew, since it was written first and a long time ago.

My point is the HOME_HEAD cannot be the Father, The head of wheat could be the Father, but the seeds in the head refer to the Son who carries the work of the Father over the nations. He is called a SEED in Psalms 2,


Ps 2:11 Serve the LORD with fear, and rejoice with trembling.

12 Kiss the Son, lest he be angry, and ye perish from the way, when his wrath is kindled but a little. Blessed are all they that put their trust in him.

Notice the way the ANcient Hebrew shows some words here:

LORD is YHWH or "Secure Person. Active Person" 

Two member of divinity here, Father and SON.

Written as Father-SON the "He who exists". 


You have to re think the creation of the elephant, the long nose one.

Did Adam see two elephant or one elephant? Yet God would have created one elephant, the masculine personality and built the other as a clone from the masculine, with XX rather than XY, so we have two personalities of loving from the elephant, but one elephant as a being, or kind. 

Adam was lonely because he saw all the creatures had their other half, but Adam could not find his other half.

In my world 1/2 + 1/2 = 1 whole.
The masculine gamete + feminine gamete = 1 new baby being.

There is nothing different between Adam and Eve in terms of matter, or number of cells or whatever, they are clones, but not personality clones, they were different styles of love.

Let us make mankind in our image. This verse says it all.

SHalom

[Dave]

BUT – she denies that Jesus Christ was God incarnate – major deal breaker

You are claiming Dave that the Father died on the Cross? Some part of the Father died, the biological body died only, so the Father didn't really die?

Jesus Christ =
(Jesus) + (Christ)
(Son of Man) + (Son of God)
(biology) + (Spirit)
Biology died upon the cross – Christ pour out His Spirit – released His Spirit back into the heavens and he went to preach to the lost from the Days of Noah
Life Lives – no one killed Divinity

Than you say the Father praying to the Father seems OK to you?
Zechariah consulted with himself – what a difficult concept to understand

You also say the Father can show love by himself?
YES – GRACE = unrequited love – the very definition

Jesus is of the same divine nature as the Father, equal in all things except rank.
Jesus Christ is of the same divine nature as the Father, equal in all things except rank.
Correct – E=mc2
m is not equal in rank
c2 is not equal in rank

You say three expressions,
Still you misquote me – I say one God singularity – E
but man can experience Him via Spirit (c2) or Christ (m)

1D = a singularity
1D – expressed = 2D medium
1D expressed via the 2D = 3D

I say three personalities of love. - We both lay claim to ONE BEING.
Than you say the Father praying to the Father seems OK to you?
You are claiming Divinity died on the Cross

Gen 1:1 who is the creator – God
John 1-1 who is the creator - Christ
Col 1 – who is the Creator – Christ

God = Christ – there is only One True Creator

BUT – she denies that Jesus Christ was God incarnate – major deal breaker
and she also contridicts scriputre and herself - so her statments mean nothing

[Deleted]

I will post some of her quotes

Counsels for the Church, p. 29.9 (Ellen Gould White)
The true prophet will confess that Jesus Christ is come in the flesh, that God was incarnate in human flesh. 1 John 4:2 .

Christian Experience and Teachings of Ellen G. White, p. 246.1 (Ellen Gould White)
The incarnation of Jesus Christ, the divine son of God, “Christ in you, the hope of glory,” is the great theme of the gospel.

Fundamentals of Christian Education, p. 385.3 (Ellen Gould White)
Christ came in the form of humanity to live the law of God. He was the word of life. He came to be the gospel of salvation to the world, and to fulfil every specification of the law. Jesus is the word, the guidebook, which must be received and obeyed in every particular. How necessary that this mine of truth be explored, and the precious treasures of truth be discovered and secured as rich jewels. The incarnation of Christ, His divinity, His atonement, His wonderful life in heaven as our advocate, the office of the Holy Spirit,—all these living, vital themes of Christianity are revealed from Genesis to Revelation.


Lift Him Up, p. 235.3 (Ellen Gould White)
There is no one who can explain the mystery of the incarnation of Christ. Yet we know that He came to this earth and lived as a man among men. The man Christ Jesus was not the Lord God Almighty, yet Christ and the Father are one. The Deity did not sink under the agonizing torture of Calvary, yet it is nonetheless true that “God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have everlasting life.”

What specifically don't you like?

Shalom