| Author |
 Topic  |
|
Robert-James
Advanced Member
uSA
353 Posts |
 Posted - 02 Mar 2004 : 21:54:07
|
Greetings All,
2-elect...if I get the name perfectly correct, then will I not have to file 1040 forms, not need license from Baal to travel or marry, or preach, or to live or die? If I can say the Name properly, can I then own Father's Land, without paying property taxes? Can I travel to Cuba without a passport issued by the govt? Since I know the father of creation's personal Name, can I now, get out of jail, without passing Go, and still collect? Can I know the sacred calendar perfectly, by just saying the name properly?
Since you must have the power to do all these things, tell us again, just how to spell this name in American-English. For I have only seen the name in paleo-hebrew...and I stand agape...or is that a-gape, in His Love.
May I stand corrected;
do you posess a LICENSE to move about ...in His Name.
do you file 1040 forms...tithe to caesar.
do you have business with Baal's temple's...Banks.
do care if they ALL CAP your name dad gave you.
do you work for an EMPLOYER
do you carry a license that baal issued for you to have permission to lay with your chosen woman
do you have a RELIGIOUS spirit
do you know that all, all the covenants are given to the House of Israel/Judah only
When I was four years old, in spirit and truth, I was still sucking milk, and spitting out falsehoods.
Neo has a message for you.
Yes, I admit I am abrasive, but not for effect, but for practical purposes. One must annoint {paint} a clean surface, else "it" will not stick long.
I admit to the world that I spell the question given in proverbs 30:4...
Father...YaHuWeH. Son...YaHuSHuaH. Why the U? Cause you better be in the midst of His name.
I really believe, after twenty years of trying to understand the Name YHWH, and raising a family of children within that name, that it will all get 'personal' when we qualify for the baptism. By the Way, baptism is of Fire, not water.
In paleo-hebrew the tetragram has four figures representing the Understanding of His Name-authority. Two of the figures, have men standing with hands held high, eyes agape...the letter H. When We see our Father's authority, we do indeed, Stand agape, at His.............Wonderment. And this experience will produce that agape Love, so spoken of by the early rain disciples...they owned all things in common. Agape burned out the greed from the inner man. All else is mere semantics.
By the Way, at this moment, at this hour, the message is, get out of BABYLON. Love the brethern, keep the Faith.
Lose the ss# and that ALL CAP name, time to wonder how to spell your name. ELECT or elect. Check your own paperwork, as you present your SELF-self, to the worldly. |
 |
|
|
Oneisraelite
Advanced Member
uSA
833 Posts |
Posted - 02 Mar 2004 : 22:21:14
|
You: "If it is, then I will use it to teach this is the Name spoken about in the Prophecy of Joel, which is the same as Peter and Paul quoted when they taught HaMashiach.
If it is not the Name spoken about through the prophecy, then why would you use it for the name to call on for salvation?"
Us: The name we are told to call on in Yahu'el 2:32, by Peter and Paul, and by the name of the Messiah, Yahu'shua is Yahweh. Translated the name of the Messiah TELLS us to call on YaHuWeH; that is what Yahu'shua means...call on the name of YaHuWeH.
fellowcitizen of the commonwealth of Yisra'el, NOT the STATE OF ISRAEL. |
|
|
|
2-elect
Occasional Poster
USA
7 Posts |
Posted - 03 Mar 2004 : 00:54:15
|
| Progressive revelations fine tune the cords of truth. We must continue to change our tune as truth becomes more clear. |
|
|
|
2-elect
Occasional Poster
USA
7 Posts |
Posted - 04 Mar 2004 : 21:23:56
|
Shalom All,
Question for scholars and questions all should consider.
Please show me from the Tanak that the name Yahushua (yod-hey-waw-shin-ayin) is the Scriptural name for people to use and call on for salvation. I want to see it spelled exactly as "yod-hey-waw-shin-ayin" from the Tanak with the context of scripture saying this will be the name to call on for salvation. If it is there I will repent and conform to scripture. I can find Yod-hey waw-hey, but I can't find yod-hey-waw-shin-ayin.
When you find it please let me know why it does not have YHWH's full Name in it.
Also, please tell me according to the scripture why you use two names for salvation when the scriptures specifically teach of only one Name. YHWH and Yahushua are clearly two different names. No one can say otherwise. The name yod-hey-waw-shin-ayin was the name for other Yisraelites.
We know from scripture YHWH"s name will be used to call on for salvation, and we know from Scripture that the name of HaMashiach is the only name given for salvation and that all will bow under this name.
Acts 4:12 Nor is there salvation in any other, for there is no other name under heaven given among men by which we must be saved."
Phil 2:10 that at the name of Yahshuah every knee should bow, of those in heaven, and of those on earth, and of those under the earth,
Isa 45:23 I have sworn by Myself; The word has gone out of My mouth in righteousness, And shall not return, That to Me every knee shall bow, Every tongue shall take an oath.
How can the name YHWH (only name given to call on for Salvation) and the name Yahushua be the same name people will bow under according to Phil 2:10 and Isa 45:23, when they are obviously two different names, and the name YHWH is not heard when the name Yahushua is spoke?
Will the name being bowed to be the same name as the other Yisraelites who had the name Yahushua? Were they worthy to have such a name?
According to Yahshuah a singular name was to be used for immersion.
Matt 28:19 Go therefore and make disciples of all the nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Ruwach HaKodesh,
Understanding that the name of the Father and Son's name was going to be used in immersion and it be a singular name used for immersion, how would this name be spelled in Hebrew and English as one name, so that the full form of the Father's and Sons Name was carried forth? How would the Father and Son's name be pronounced in just one name and not two? A fulfillment of one calling on the singular name for salvation in immersion is as follows, which is a fulfillment of Yoel:2:32
Acts 22:15-16 And now why are you waiting? Arise and be baptized, and wash away your sins, calling on the name of Yahshuah.
Please show us how scriptural sound the name Yahushua is for the name of the Mashiach, not from copies of texts which could have been written by those who followed traditions, but from points in scripture.
Thank you. I wait for your reply,
Yahuah bless us all with the truth of His name in His Mashiach
Shalom
|
|
|
|
Robert-James
Advanced Member
uSA
353 Posts |
Posted - 04 Mar 2004 : 22:42:48
|
2-Elect, I finally see where you are! I have a four year old daughter, and if I even heard the word-name, daddy, my heart would melt with pleasure...she is really talking to me, even just me!
Daniel Jacob travels about, risking jail time, for his belief that Jesus Christ gives Him the freedom to do so. Daniel will not ask Caesar's minions permission to travel. He has asked Jesus the Christ, and was given permission to be about Father's business. John Bunyon {Pilgrim's Progress} asked his "Jesus the Christ" permission to set up ecclesia's without LICENSE from the king-pope crowd. John was given permission to do so. Protest-ants, when the word meant something! John spend twelve years in prison for not bowing the knee to the ceasar's of the time, called king-pope. {gubberment}
Now, I agree with you in that in this Third Day We must come into perfection {Luke 13:32}, and to finally call upon the Right Name is of importance.
But this religious thing about being dunked into a water pool, with the correct vowels and consonants, in the proper order is redundant, to the extreme. So says me.
You evaded my questions on your own walk, and the questions I earnstly asked. By a no answer, you admitted that you do all those things I listed.
You serve Caesar-government, and have not chosen the Messiah of Israel, Yahushuah-Jesus-yahushua, you pick the word...by your very own walk. Think Daniel Jacob and many others here, care to hear the matter, if you walk not according to the Commandments? So have we right to say: if we say verbally Yahshua help me then we can continue to file 1040 forms, to support the murder of Iraqi peoples? With 1040 form tithes support fags in office and the MARRIAGE of such called fags-sodomites and 4,000 children butchered in their dumb mommies womb every day PLEASE...not to mention USURY, which has a death sentence attached to it, so says the tanach...which word is also redundant. Try prophets and psalms...and His-story. A Zionist Jew taught me one thing...to understand Revelations 2:9 and 3:9. For ha-stan always has to show his cards, and so few care to look.
I have raised a family of many with the sacred names of the Father and Son being on their lips, but to put the name unto their hearts is above a mere father's pay grade. Name, does many times, not always, mean, authority...obedience.
Keep up the good works, on His name, for thou shall be rewarded, but, and, this Name turned Caesar's world upside down! The POLITICAL world. Brother Robert {oneisraelite} turns the worldly right side up, every time he is jailed for witnessing Messiah Yahushuah gives him permission to travel about in the Power of the Name.
Get my drift? You seem correct in the semantics, just put some feet to the process. IF the Name IS so Powerful, why ye seek the blessings of gubberment? A dollar to a donut that you are known by a PRETEND name, i.e. MR. ALL CAP...though your earthly Dad named you All Cap. Comprende?
Help us out here, BATKOL is proud to be a PERSON, are you also? Or, is my talk gibberish, and you need Daniel Jacob to interrupt? {or Neo}
What say ye? You have fallen into the midst of the called out.
Thanks for your stance on calling Truth by its right name, I mean that. But what about you?
I shall stick to the thought form that there better be a "u" in the midst of the Name. You.
Psalm 110 and proverbs 30:4 list two. Go figure. 351 or 352. Or in American 153-152. Benyamin's name equals 152. Sharpen thy pencil, for a great Test is coming upon all. And my prayer and hope is that 2-elect prevails!
Praise YaHuWeH and the redeemed said so. So. HalleluYah.
Too bad we can not sing on ecclesia.org
|
|
|
|
BatKol
Advanced Member
USA
735 Posts |
Posted - 05 Mar 2004 : 17:54:30
|
Robert-James said: Help us out here, BATKOL is proud to be a PERSON, are you also?
Steve: You don't speak for me so let me correct you: I Am proud be scripted into YHWH's master plan, doing His pleasure at all times however He sees fit... moment to moment to moment to moment! |
|
|
|
Caleb
Advanced Member
Philippines
209 Posts |
Posted - 07 Mar 2004 : 19:35:38
|
Most of this discussion is well above my pay grade, but I have learned that there are indeed scriptures within the scriptures once you learn the meanings of the names.
2 Elect, it is clear to me that oneisraelite answered your question. Yahweh and "call upon Yahweh" are the same name. There has only, always and ever been one King.
In that vein, I was contemplating out loud the pronunciation of YHVH rendered Yah-oo-ah, as I had never considered that both heys should be pronounced the same. My six year old daughter overheard me say "Yah-oo-ah" and she replied, "That's Yahshua!"
Out of the mouths of infants and nursing babes.
"Of the increase of His government and peace there shall be no end"
Isaiah 9:7 |
|
|
|
2-elect
Occasional Poster
USA
7 Posts |
Posted - 08 Mar 2004 : 01:20:09
|
quote:
Originally posted by Caleb
Most of this discussion is well above my pay grade, but I have learned that there are indeed scriptures within the scriptures once you learn the meanings of the names.
2 Elect, it is clear to me that oneisraelite answered your question. Yahweh and "call upon Yahweh" are the same name. There has only, always and ever been one King.
In that vein, I was contemplating out loud the pronunciation of YHVH rendered Yah-oo-ah, as I had never considered that both heys should be pronounced the same. My six year old daughter overheard me say "Yah-oo-ah" and she replied, "That's Yahshua!"
Out of the mouths of infants and nursing babes.
"Of the increase of His government and peace there shall be no end"
Isaiah 9:7
Hi Caleb,
Then you should spell it as Yahuah and not as Yahweh. She will be confused later if you don't, because she will speak it with a weh sound when she reads it. I do not know of anyone who will get a oo-ah sound out of weh.
She heard the name Yahuah in the name you have taught her. That is why she said, that is Yah-sh-oo-ah. Remove the sh sound from Yahshua you have Yahweh?? No, you have Yah-oo-ah. She knows she is using Yahuah when she uses Yahshua. That should be a lesson for all of us.
Out of the mouths of infants and nursing babes.
According to Yahshuah a singular name was to be used for immersion.
Matt 28:19 Go therefore and make disciples of all the nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Ruwach HaKodesh,
Understanding that the name of the Father and Son's name was going to be used in immersion and it be a singular name used for immersion, how would this name be spelled in Hebrew and English as one name, so that the full form of the Father's and Sons Name was carried forth?
How would the Father and Son's name be pronounced in just one name and not two?
You daughters knows!!
Shalom
|
Edited by - 2-elect on 08 Mar 2004 01:24:03 |
|
|
|
Caleb
Advanced Member
Philippines
209 Posts |
Posted - 08 Mar 2004 : 04:22:32
|
Dear 2 Elect,
I thought you would be pleased.
I don't disagree with a thing you said above. I simply give the rest of the forum members credit for being able to see the child-like simplicity of it and make up their own mind. Thus I saw no need to spell it out in detail.
"Of the increase of His government and peace there shall be no end"
Isaiah 9:7 |
|
|
|
2-elect
Occasional Poster
USA
7 Posts |
Posted - 08 Mar 2004 : 13:20:19
|
quote:
Originally posted by Caleb
Dear 2 Elect,
I thought you would be pleased.
I don't disagree with a thing you said above. I simply give the rest of the forum members credit for being able to see the child-like simplicity of it and make up their own mind. Thus I saw no need to spell it out in detail.
"Of the increase of His government and peace there shall be no end"
Isaiah 9:7
Shalom Caleb
Please forgive me, I was tired and a bit confused over parts of what you wrote. I do thank you for sharing this. Please accept my apology.
Shalom
2-elect |
|
|
|
Walter
Advanced Member
USA
144 Posts |
Posted - 10 Mar 2004 : 20:23:01
|
I'm working on collecting information on the derivation of our current (Roman) alphabet from its ancient roots. Here's one link to a chart taken from the Academic American Encyclopedia: http://home.earthlink.net/~walterk12/HIB/Language/AlphabetChart1.gif
For those not familar with the mapping of modern, square Hebrew characters to the original, "paleo-" ones, here is a chart showing the mapping: http://home.earthlink.net/~walterk12/HIB/HIB_Pics/HebChart.gif Be aware that there are varying forms of the early letters.
What these show is that our modern vowel characters (a,e,i,o,u) and some consonants derive from early paleo forms; specifically, a from aleph; e from he; i, j, and y from yod; o from oyin; and u and v from vau or waw. One can also see that the Greek vowels derived from the same root. There is disagreement, as we know, over just what those particular paleo letters meant.
>> The Semitic letter aleph, representing a smooth breathing, became Greek alpha, representing the vowel "a"; he became epsilon, "e"; yodh became iota, "i"; ayin became omicron, "o"; and waw became upsilon, "u". - Writing Systems, Evolution of; AAE, Vol W, p. 293.<<
I find it obvious that the Greek adoption of the early Hebrew/Aramaic shows that the early Hebrew alphabet had the same vowels as did the corresponding letters in the Greek alphabet.
On another chart of the tree of evolution of Near East writing, not yet available to link, is shown the Early Hebrew on the left Canaanite Branch, while the Square Hebrew is on the Aramaic branch on the right, derived from the Aramaic. Aramaic, was the principal commercial alphabet of the ancient Near East. While various other scripts are shown to have derived from this Aramaic script, it should be noted that both the commercial Aramiac and the Square Hebrew were in the hands of the same stock of people; ergo I conclude that Square Hebrew is the alphabet of a commercial language. The Early Hebrew was supplanted by the Square Hebrew, it is said after about 500 B.C.
The conclusion is obvious to me, but I'll admit it must be open to debate, that the Early Hebrew alphabet had vowels similar to the Greek, and that the Square Hebrew changed those symbols to mean something else - their modernly known consonants, which require "pointings" - for "commercial usage." Thus I boldly will warn my brothers and sisters in Christ that their adoption and usage of their "modernly" assigned sounds may be joining in the commercial exploitation of "God's" (I say IAUE, but I won't press on that just now) word and in making commerce of "God's" and our Savior's name. I see the obvious adoption above of the "modern" interpretation (of what may be vowels) as consonants in the various names attributed to "God" and "Jesus." The correct names may (as I believe) require interpreting some of the aforementioned Hebrew characters in those names as vowels. All disputation over what vowel sounds are understood to be added to the names is really wasted energy until this matter is investigated, wouldn't you all agree? Hit the books guys!
Please correct me if you can prove me wrong. I hope to collect some other materials and make a web page of them sometime soon.
I pray IAUE bless all who search out the truth in this matter. |
Edited by - Walter on 10 Mar 2004 21:23:11 |
|
|
|
Walter
Advanced Member
USA
144 Posts |
Posted - 13 Mar 2004 : 19:30:50
|
| Are there any Greek (Hellenic) language scholars here? I've been wondering about the Septuagint. Put yourself in their sandals: if you were a Hebrew of old called upon to translate your holy scriptures into Greek, how would you write your God's holy name in the Greek? Why didn't you transliterate Yahweh, Yahuah, Jehovah, YHWH, YHVH or whatever other name you believe "God's" name is? Why did you (they) make up the name Theos? |
|
|
|
BatKol
Advanced Member
USA
735 Posts |
Posted - 13 Mar 2004 : 20:40:31
|
Walter said: if you were a Hebrew of old called upon to translate your holy scriptures into Greek, how would you write your God's holy name in the Greek? Why didn't you transliterate Yahweh, Yahuah, Jehovah, YHWH, YHVH or whatever other name you believe "God's" name is? Why did you (they) make up the name Theos?
Steve: My speculation is that, considering the GREEK overlords wanted a copy of the Torah to understand those they RULED over, the 72 elders did not want YHWH's name available for vanity. Greek was considered a pagan language and we are talking about a people who have been in exile since Babylon. Many, many generations.
If you want access to some scholars check out:
www.theologyweb.com. Excellent site with students, scholars, and serious studiers debating and discussng a very wide-range of topics.
Just my two cents.
Steve
|
|
|
|
Walter
Advanced Member
USA
144 Posts |
Posted - 19 Mar 2004 : 02:09:13
|
(BatKol, that really is blind speculation. I may seek help from them someday - but can you ask for me??!!)
Some resources:
"For the first time in two thousand years, in a public national establishment in Jerusalem, at the Residence of the Presidents of Israel, a speech was made in ancient Hebrew, in an accent, which the greatest linguist of Samaritan-Hebrew an Aramaic languages, Professor Zeev ben Hayeem, may he enjoy longevity, calls The Hebrew of the Second Temple Period."
http://www.mystae.com/reflections/messiah/scripts/honor.html
"The Samaritan script is the original ancient script of the Hebrews, unlike the modern Hebrew script of today that originated from Babylon. The Samaritan script is the Palaeo-Hebrew script. Still today the Samaritan script can be found on inscriptions, seals, coins, ancient manuscripts (even from Qumran), etc."
http://www.the-samaritans.com/script.htm
From a chart copied/scanned from Collier's Encyclopedia (1996):
http://home.earthlink.net/~walterk12/HIB/Language/LangChart.jpg
one sees that Samartian is derivative of the original Early Hebrew. It appears that the Samaritans held onto the original script, or at least something close to it.
One cannot miss or ignore the story of the Good Samaritan (Luke 10:30-35), who, after (one) had fallen "among thieves, which stripped him of his raiment, and wounded" (him), and departed, leaving (him) half dead, had been passed by by a certain priest and the passed by by a Levite, was saved by a Samaritan who "had compassion (on him), [a]nd went to (him), and bound up his wounds, pouring in oil and wine, and set him on his own beast, and brought him to an inn, and took care of him." And payed for all the costs of caring for (him).
Surely these Samaritans have held onto the original script, keepng it alive, as it were, for us.
Surely Jesus' parables do not fail in their extension to real world events!!!
How appropriate that the Samaritans have kept the (script), that was stripped and wounded, from dying and have payed for (its) recovery to this day. A script that was passed by by priests and Levites - who adopted the Square Hebrew - is still available today. They still use the original pronunciation, according to the website. Maybe we should look towards them? |
|
|
|
DanielJacob
Advanced Member
USA
138 Posts |
Posted - 19 Mar 2004 : 09:56:28
|
Greetings Brothers,
Peace unto all here.
quote:
"For the first time in two thousand years, in a public national establishment in Jerusalem, at the Residence of the Presidents of Israel, a speech was made in ancient Hebrew, in an accent, which the greatest linguist of Samaritan-Hebrew an Aramaic languages, Professor Zeev ben Hayeem, may he enjoy longevity, calls The Hebrew of the Second Temple Period."
and;quote:
Surely these Samaritans have held onto the original script, keeping it alive, as it were, for us. Surely Jesus' parables do not fail in their extension to real world events!!!
Brothers, I must consider:
Are these the same Samaritans that replaced the original northern kingdom of Israel in 721 - 718 B.C.?
Are these the same Samaritans who were men of Babylon, Cuthah, Hamath, Ava, and Sepharvaim, that Shalmaneser, king of Assyria sent to Samaria, as spoken of by the word of the Eternal through Samuel at II Kings 17:24-41?
The same Samaritans that, even after Shalmaneser, king of Assyria, had sent back one of the priests of the northern kingdom that was carried away because they mocked the Eternal and worshiped the Golden Calves of Jeraboam, to these impostors, who, "feared the Lord", and made gods of their own; Succothbenoth, Nergal, Ashima, Nibhaz and Tartak, and Adrammelech and Anammelech?
The same Samaritans that made unto themselves priests of the lowest of men among them and "feared the Lord, and served their own gods, after the manner of the nations whom they carried away from thence."?
Peace brothers.
|
|
|
|
Walter
Advanced Member
USA
144 Posts |
Posted - 19 Mar 2004 : 11:08:06
|
quote:
Originally posted by DanielJacob
The same Samaritans that made unto themselves priests of the lowest of men among them and "feared the Lord, and served their own gods, after the manner of the nations whom they carried away from thence."?
What is your point? You mean like most people do today? Stories of greivously sinful (and well supported) ministers are not rare.
I don't know whether those people are the same or not; they might be. But the point is the same, these people called Samaritans are keeping the original script while those who should have done kept it have instead preferred a corruption. The parable of the Good Samaritan applies in two ways: being a neighbor to ones fellow man and being a caretaker of God's business. Jesus made the parable, please don't forget.
Luke 10:
36 Which now of these three, thinkest thou, was neighbour unto him that fell among the thieves?
37 And he said, He that shewed mercy on him. Then said Jesus unto him, Go, and do thou likewise.
Another way to say this could be that God will appoint those who we dispise to do our jobs when we don't. The glory that should have been ours is granted to another who actually carries out God's plan. (The same precept applies when certain women were raised up to do the job the men wouldn't.)
I just see this Samaritan sect holding onto the original script as yet another manifestation of the authority of God and His word. It really doesn't matter to me who they are. We should take it to heart (I do) that we should be keeping the original script in use and turn away from the pharisee corruption. |
|
|
|
DanielJacob
Advanced Member
USA
138 Posts |
Posted - 19 Mar 2004 : 20:13:04
|
Brother Walter,
I thought that my point was obvious. Your post made the point that "for the first time in two thousand years" a speech was made, by the "greatest linguist" of Samaritan-Hebrew, purportedly from this group of imposters. "The Samaritan script is the original ancient script of the Hebrews, unlike the modern Hebrew script of today that originated from Babylon." These people originated from Babylon, therefore the previous statement doesn't stand up to historical criticism. That was my point. I didn't see that you were trying to verify that assumption with the illustration that one of those imposters was capable of simple acts of kindness that should be embraced by those that profess their devotion to the Father and His Son. Many today claim to be atheists and still give a helping hand to his fellow man.
Peace be unto you. |
|
|
|
Walter
Advanced Member
USA
144 Posts |
Posted - 20 Mar 2004 : 00:02:44
|
quote:
Originally posted by DanielJacob
... These people originated from Babylon, therefore the previous statement doesn't stand up to historical criticism. ...
My pardon, I have other evidence as to the original script that I have not linked, nor completely compiled. I have no doubts that the orignal script looks similar to what these Samaritans use. I ignore self-agrandisement in their news releases. I care only about the script (or font, if you will). The original script relates directly to some of our present alphabet; the Babylonian is vulgar. The orignial script is symbolic and that symbolism is used in patterns in the Bible.
You know, Daniel, I've noticed that sometimes our worst enemies occasionally give us good, insightful information. I don't know whether they do it for fun (to see if we catch on), or whether because they are carrying out God's purpose for a stubborn and stiff-necked people. But some of the most interesting insights I've gotten from those who proved to be the opposition; one just has to learn that their purpose is to deceive those desiring to be led by lies, and to be on guard for them. Even so, interesting things can pass though their lips, which one must verify, but this is all to the glory of IAUE [God].
I do not claim these present day Samaritans are saints, but they are indeed, I believe, fulfilling a necessary calling of God. |
|
|
|
Manuel
Advanced Member
USA
762 Posts |
Posted - 20 Mar 2004 : 03:12:32
|
Greetings to: todos mis hermanos (all my brothers),
Interesting enough, It is good that I did a little research and found the following which I think sheds light on this topic of discussion:
TONGUES AT CORINTH: LANGUAGES NOT ECSTASIES!
by Dr. N. Lee
The Character of the Corinthian Tongues
Scripture itself suggests that these Corinthian tongues -- just like those on Pentecost Sunday -- were not incommunicable ecstatic utterances. They were clearly linguistic -- that is, spoken in translatable and recognised human languages. Compare I Cor. 14:21f and Isa. 28:11f with Acts 2:4-11. As Dr. W.B. Godby rightly observes in his Commentary, cosmopolitan ancient Corinth was "really a mammoth mongrel of all nationalities."
The international ancient trading city of Corinth had a very unusual location -- on the slender isthmus in Central Greece, between the two much larger land-masses of Northern Greece and Southern Greece, and also between the Adriatic and Ionian Seas to the west and the Aegean Sea to the east. Corinth's location there was thus similar to that of Panama City in the new world --on the thin waist of Central America, between the two great continents of North America and South America, and also between the Pacific Ocean to the west and the Atlantic Ocean to the east.
In the international trading centre of Panama City today, at least twenty different languages are regularly spoken. So too in ancient Corinth. There, none of those various foreign languages was to be spoken during worship in the Corinthian Church --unless translated. If so used, those foreign languages were always to be translated into the Corinthian dialect -- so that all present could understand the message concerned.
In its entirety at:
http://www.nccg.org/469Art-Corinth.html
I am,
Manuel |
|
|
|
DanielJacob
Advanced Member
USA
138 Posts |
Posted - 20 Mar 2004 : 09:56:41
|
Brother Walter,
Your right, I would agree that there is the possibility to learn something from the scripts. I guess I am always skeptical when something is presented as being a significant find and the underlying evidence doesn't support the overall assumptions. I see those events as having the fingerprints of Satan. His presentations always have just enough that sounds possible to draw the elect.
I have read that ancient Hebrew, along with Aramaic writings developed from the Phoenician alphabet. Did Abram speak Hebrew, Phoenician, Aramaic, or Akkadian that was spoken in what is now Iraq about 2000 B.C.? This is why I have such a hard time when other brothers want to espouse the idea that there is only one way to pronounce the Name of the Eternal or His Son. Languages change over time. It should be most evident even in this modern day. We are said to speak English, but those on the Island would disagree. Many words are not pronounced phonetically. Just too many questions that have no answers.
Peace to you brother. |
Edited by - DanielJacob on 20 Mar 2004 09:59:17 |
|
|
|
Topic |
|
|
|
His name is not Yahushua
