Religion II

[thaskalos]

Originally Posted by PaceAdvantage

Yes, I know, whenever someone presents troubling info that causes you to actually think, it's stirring up trouble.

https://ohr.edu/ask/ask00j.htm

http://www.auburn.edu/~allenkc/trinity.html

Jesus was a Jew...who never strayed far from Israel. And yet...Boxcar knows more about him than the Jews with whom Jesus associated directly. Boxcar's religious knowledge truly knows no boundaries.

[boxcar]

Originally Posted by thaskalos

Jesus was a Jew...who never strayed far from Israel. And yet...Boxcar knows more about him than the Jews with whom Jesus associated directly. Boxcar's religious knowledge truly knows no boundaries.

Huh? What are you talking about? "The Jews with whom Jesus associated directly" either wrote the NT or provided information directly to the writers who did. And this means you and I are privy to the same information as everyone else.

[boxcar]

Originally Posted by Actor

I could slice through your ignorance of science long ago.
Does he?
That much is obvious. But are you claiming that one of the "Lords" is Yahweh and the other is Adoniy? If so then where do you get Yahweh and Adoniy from? Neither of those words are in the Bible, neither the KJV nor the NASB.

You do know that the original language of the OT is not English, right? So, yes...in the original Hebrew there are two different nouns used for the term "Lord", which is used twice, in verse 1 of Psalm 110. Got it now?

But never never forget this, Mr. Actor: You'll never be able to "slice through" the self-defeating philosophy of atheistic naturalism. This is one heavy anchor from which you'll never be able shake yourself free.

[boxcar]

Originally Posted by PaceAdvantage

Yes, I know, whenever someone presents troubling info that causes you to actually think, it's stirring up trouble.

https://ohr.edu/ask/ask00j.htm

http://www.auburn.edu/~allenkc/trinity.html

Evidently, the info I presented to you exceedingly troubling -- so much so it has shut your mouth, Mr. No Answers. Here's another "troubling" and "subtle hint" to the Trinity. Riddle of us this, Mr. No Answers:

Ps 45:1-7
1 My heart overflows with a good theme;
I address my verses to the King;
My tongue is the pen of a ready writer.
2 Thou art fairer than the sons of men;
Grace is poured upon Thy lips;
Therefore God has blessed Thee forever.

3 Gird Thy sword on
Thy thigh, O Mighty One, In Thy splendor and Thy majesty!
4 And in Thy majesty ride on victoriously,
For the cause of truth and meekness and righteousness;
Let Thy right hand teach Thee awesome things.
5 Thine arrows are sharp;
The peoples fall under Thee;
Thine arrows are in the heart of the King's enemies.

6 Thy throne, O God, is forever and ever;
A scepter of uprightness is the scepter of Thy kingdom.
7 Thou hast loved righteousness, and hated wickedness;
Therefore, God, Thy God has anointed Thee
With the oil of joy above Thy fellows.
NASB

1. Who is the "King" spoken of in v. 1?

2. Who is the "Thee" in v. 2?

3. To whom do the arrows belong in v.5?

4. Whose throne is spoken of in v.6?

5. To whom belongs the kingdom in v.6?

6. Does v.7 contradict the monotheism of "Jewish theology"? Do the two Gods contradict Deut 6:4? If not, then who are the two Gods and how can there be two Gods?

Are you working on getting your new found buddy the "rabbi" over here?












.

[Actor]

Originally Posted by boxcar

You do know that the original language of the OT is not English, right? So, yes...in the original Hebrew there are two different nouns used for the term "Lord", which is used twice, in verse 1 of Psalm 110. Got it now?

That still does not tell us where you got Yahweh and Adoniy from, two words that are not in the Bible. You are side stepping the issue. Like PA said you are more interested in one hand clapping.

Originally Posted by boxcar

But never never forget this, Mr. Actor: You'll never be able to "slice through" the self-defeating philosophy of atheistic naturalism.

Another side step. I'll address that when we've disposed of Yahweh and Adoniy.

[PaceAdvantage]

Originally Posted by Actor

That still does not tell us where you got Yahweh and Adoniy from, two words that are not in the Bible. You are side stepping the issue. Like PA said you are more interested in one hand clapping.

Another side step. I'll address that when we've disposed of Yahweh and Adoniy.

They are both Hebrew names for God, one more sacred than the other.

All this Trinity stuff relating to the OT is nothing more than some serious backfitting...if you were doing this in horse racing, you'd get killed at the windows thinking you'd found the key to the mint.

[Actor]

Originally Posted by PaceAdvantage

They are both Hebrew names for God, one more sacred than the other.

But neither is in the Bible. Is boxcar pointing out that you don't know the answer while at the same time refusing to admit that he does not know the answer either? He's playing word games.

[ReplayRandall]

Originally Posted by Actor

But neither is in the Bible. Is boxcar pointing out that you don't know the answer while at the same time refusing to admit that he does not know the answer either? He's playing word games.

If you look at the front of your King James version you should see a disclaimer. It should state that the original name YHWY, in english translated Jehovah, was taken out and replaced with the word GOD or LORD capitalized.

In Jesus time the Jews had come to regard God's name as too sacred to be pronounced, so wherever the name Yahweh appeared in the text, they substituted Adonai ("Lord"). When the KJV translation came to be made the translators followed their lead, and substituted LORD (in capital letters) wherever "Yahweh" appears in the original.

Moving on......Red heifer without blemish is found, why is this important? This discovery leads the movement in Jerusalem to push for the 3rd Temple being built:

YouTube (Short URL)

[boxcar]

Originally Posted by Actor

That still does not tell us where you got Yahweh and Adoniy from, two words that are not in the Bible. You are side stepping the issue. Like PA said you are more interested in one hand clapping.

Another side step. I'll address that when we've disposed of Yahweh and Adoniy.

You are really incredible. The two terms are in the HEBREW bible! You should avail yourself of all the various bible tools available online. You need to look at an Interlinear Bible.

[boxcar]

Mr. Actor, here is a Hebrew transliteration (BHS) for Ps 110 1. Note the words that I have put in bold.

Ps 110:1

110
l®¼¹wi¼ miz®môr n®°um y®hw¹h la°¼onî š¢» lîmînî ±a¼-°¹šî¾ °oy®»ey½¹ h¦¼om l®raº®ley½¹.

[traynor]

Life can indeed be simple if one "preserves one's precious and limited cognitive resouirces for more important matters" by accepting as "true" all that is said or written that coincides with one's preconceptions and existing "beliefs" and rejecting as "untrue" all that is said or written that disagrees with those preconceptions and existing "beliefs."

It is interesting to witness the degree to which people are able to select as "true" that which agrees with them, and summarily dismiss as "untrue" or irrelevant the mountains of material and disconfirming evidence that disagrees with them, when, in actual fact, there is no distinction between the two sets of material other than a subjective desire to accept one set and reject the other.

When the only "proof" consists of uncritical acceptance of the writings of others as "accurate and true statements of objective reality"--that totally ignores the degree to which the most well-intentioned "witnesses" are manipulated by their own subjective beliefs, preconceptions, and perceptual filters--one might do well to learn more about the psychology of those "reporting events" and the degree to which that psychology influences what is reported and how it is reported.

"Groupthink is a psychological phenomenon that occurs within a group of people in which the desire for harmony or conformity in the group results in an irrational or dysfunctional decision-making outcome. Group members try to minimize conflict and reach a consensus decision without critical evaluation of alternative viewpoints by actively suppressing dissenting viewpoints, and by isolating themselves from outside influences."
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Groupthink

"In psychology, cognitive dissonance is the mental stress (discomfort) experienced by a person who simultaneously holds two or more contradictory beliefs, ideas, or values; when performing an action that contradicts one of those beliefs, ideas, or values; or when confronted with new information that contradicts one of the beliefs, ideas, and values."
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cognitive_dissonance

And even more importantly:
"A false memory is the psychological phenomenon wherein a person recalls something that did not occur."
"Construction hypothesis has major implications for explanations on the malleability of memory. Upon asking a respondent with a question that provides a presupposition, the respondent will provide a recall in accordance with the presupposition (if accepted to exist in the first place). The respondent will recall the object or detail. The construction hypothesis says that if a true piece of information being provided can alter a respondent's answer, then so can a false piece of information."
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/False_memory

It might be more useful to better understand the cognitive processes of the reporters than to obsess about the content of the reports. The words and writings of ordinary people--with all their many failings, shortcomings, biases, and deficiencies--will never be more than the words and writings of ordinary people. Without regard for whether the topic is religion, "UFOs", "near-death experiences", politics, or horse racing.

Regardless of the topic, the simple fact that someone thought, said, or wrote that such and such was thus and so is no guarantee whatsoever that it actually is (or was, or will be) thus and so. Words are only words.

[dnlgfnk]

Originally Posted by traynor

Life can indeed be simple if one "preserves one's precious and limited cognitive resouirces for more important matters" by accepting as "true" all that is said or written that coincides with one's preconceptions and existing "beliefs" and rejecting as "untrue" all that is said or written that disagrees with those preconceptions and existing "beliefs."

It is interesting to witness the degree to which people are able to select as "true" that which agrees with them, and summarily dismiss as "untrue" or irrelevant the mountains of material and disconfirming evidence that disagrees with them, when, in actual fact, there is no distinction between the two sets of material other than a subjective desire to accept one set and reject the other.

When the only "proof" consists of uncritical acceptance of the writings of others as "accurate and true statements of objective reality"--that totally ignores the degree to which the most well-intentioned "witnesses" are manipulated by their own subjective beliefs, preconceptions, and perceptual filters--one might do well to learn more about the psychology of those "reporting events" and the degree to which that psychology influences what is reported and how it is reported.

"Groupthink is a psychological phenomenon that occurs within a group of people in which the desire for harmony or conformity in the group results in an irrational or dysfunctional decision-making outcome. Group members try to minimize conflict and reach a consensus decision without critical evaluation of alternative viewpoints by actively suppressing dissenting viewpoints, and by isolating themselves from outside influences."
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Groupthink

"In psychology, cognitive dissonance is the mental stress (discomfort) experienced by a person who simultaneously holds two or more contradictory beliefs, ideas, or values; when performing an action that contradicts one of those beliefs, ideas, or values; or when confronted with new information that contradicts one of the beliefs, ideas, and values."
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cognitive_dissonance

And even more importantly:
"A false memory is the psychological phenomenon wherein a person recalls something that did not occur."
"Construction hypothesis has major implications for explanations on the malleability of memory. Upon asking a respondent with a question that provides a presupposition, the respondent will provide a recall in accordance with the presupposition (if accepted to exist in the first place). The respondent will recall the object or detail. The construction hypothesis says that if a true piece of information being provided can alter a respondent's answer, then so can a false piece of information."
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/False_memory

It might be more useful to better understand the cognitive processes of the reporters than to obsess about the content of the reports. The words and writings of ordinary people--with all their many failings, shortcomings, biases, and deficiencies--will never be more than the words and writings of ordinary people. Without regard for whether the topic is religion, "UFOs", "near-death experiences", politics, or horse racing.

Regardless of the topic, the simple fact that someone thought, said, or wrote that such and such was thus and so is no guarantee whatsoever that it actually is (or was, or will be) thus and so. Words are only words.

Including what you've worked hard to quote and write here?

[dnlgfnk]

Originally Posted by boxcar

Mr. Actor, here is a Hebrew transliteration (BHS) for Ps 110 1. Note the words that I have put in bold.

Ps 110:1

110
l®¼¹wi¼ miz®môr n®°um y®hw¹h la°¼onî š¢» lîmînî ±a¼-°¹šî¾ °oy®»ey½¹ h¦¼om l®raº®ley½¹.

I don't know if you've offered a more bewildering presentation than the idea that the Trinity, of which every Christian I've ever read or discussed with believes to have required direct revelation from Christ, was somehow accessible to the covenanted of Israel.

The covenant with Israel, for you and me was preparatory, whereby the oneness of God against the temptations of her polytheistic neighbors was incessantly stressed to Israel. We would say the Holy Spirit was fully given at Pentecost--yet there was no danger in simultaneously giving Israel two critical concepts to balance, the Oneness of God and the nascent understandings of the Trinity deliberated into later creeds? You're confusing Trinitarian allusions in the Hebrew scriptures for Christians, with the sacred author understanding everything he was inscribing in the Hebrew scriptures, i.e., the unitive understanding of the testaments/covenants available to the Christian of the New Testament.


I went back a bit to grasp what motivated you. It seems Actor stated to the effect that Christians have settled on "three gods" after Israel's preoccupation with "one". After two religion threads and five figure posts, your interlocutors cannot even state what ought to be your principal belief accurately.

Here's the verse you really need to internalize...Rom 16:17.

[Actor]

Originally Posted by boxcar

Mr. Actor, here is a Hebrew transliteration (BHS) for Ps 110 1. Note the words that I have put in bold.

Ps 110:1

110
l®¼¹wi¼ miz®môr n®°um y®hw¹h la°¼onî š¢» lîmînî ±a¼-°¹šî¾ °oy®»ey½¹ h¦¼om l®raº®ley½¹.

Your translation is garbage. I'm not being figurative. I don't know what you are seeing on your browser but I'm seeing garbage.

[Actor]

Originally Posted by boxcar

You are really incredible. The two terms are in the HEBREW bible!

You could have said that long ago.

Now you bring up more questions. Why did the translators translate both words as "Lord?" Are any English, or Greek, or German, or Latin, etc. translations valid?

Originally Posted by boxcar

You should avail yourself of all the various bible tools available online. You need to look at an Interlinear Bible.

Why? Scripture proves nothing.