| Author |
 Topic  |
|
stefree
Regular Member
USA
45 Posts |
 Posted - 10 Jul 2005 : 16:15:26
|
Ladies and Gentlemen of this Forum,
After reading some of these posts about the Sacred Name of YHWH I must warn you about something quite serious and simultaneously rebuke you...
The text in Daniel 8:14 "....unto two thousand and three hundred days; then shall the sanctuary be cleansed." is the clue to perhaps one of the most elusive mysteries in the sacred and secular worlds...It is spoken by the "Wonderful Numberer" who, has been a topic of this forum before... "Palmoni" is a contracted Hebrew word, derived from two words, (Pele) and (Mena). Pele means "wonderful" (Isaiah 9:6) and Menu means "numberer." (see Daniel 5:25,26 where the words "mene, mene," are translated numberer.)
I believe the Wonderful Numberer to be Christ and not Pythagoras, as the same "saint" is spoken of again in Daniel 10:5 and also ch.12. v.7 and it is evident that it refers to Christ...
In the ancient Jewish economy, the "Cleansing of the Sanctuary" was the work of the High Priest ("Who serve unto the example and shadow of heavenly things...." [Hebrews 8:5]) on the Day of Atonement. The Day of Atonement was a shadow or symbol of the Judgement and those who had not transferred their sins by a sacrifice to the sanctuary were "cut off" from Israel. (Lev. 16:5-34; Lev. 23:27-32).
The sinner in type transfers sin to the substitute. Sin is a transgression of God's law which was inscribed in the Most Holy Place of the sanctuary or temple. (Lev. 4:27-30, 1 John 3:4, Rom. 6:23, Heb. 9:3,4; Ex. 40:20,21; Deut. 10:4,5.
The priests carried on the service of the the sanctuary every day in the first apartment or Holy Place (Heb.9:6) and into the second apartment or Most Holy Place, the high priest alone went once each year (on the Day of Atonement). This was the Day of Atonement or cleansing of the sanctuary (Lev.16:29,30). The culmination of this most sacred of days in YHWH's calendar was the placement of the sins of the children of Israel on the head of the scapegoat, (the originator of their sins) who was then led away into a land "not inhabited". (Lev.16:20-22)
Christ's atoning death on the cross, did away with the ceremonial law and the levitical priesthood (Heb.7:12). He (Christ) now is "Called of God an High Priest after the order of Melchisedec" [Heb.5:10]). His death, however, did not do away with the statutes and moral law of which the Day of Atonement is part. (Mat.5:17) Herein lies the key to understanding of the most enigmatic mysteries of modern Christianity....
There is, in the secular science of "Egyptology", a date in the timeline of the Great Pyramid of Giza which is found at the "Great Step" and is one of the three critical dates in the chronology of Christianity (the Exodus and the crucifiction being the other two). The date is 1844. There has much speculation about this date for years, but, in fact, it has been simply that, there has been no comprehensive understanding of the date to date...even a cursive check of the chronology of the Giza timeline will show that mystery still "shrouds" the date of the "Great Step"...
The Angel of Revelation 2:11 says "He that hath an ear, let him hear...." as the Angel of Daniel 9:22 speaks "....I am now come forth to give thee skill and understanding."
We must first establish the day for a year "rule of prophesy" found in Numbers 14:34 & Ezekiel 4:6. This means the 2300 days represent 2300 years and is tied in with the 70 week(or 490 day) prophesy of Daniel 9:24, which began with the command of Artaxerxes to "restore and build Jerusalem" (Ezra 7:11-26). This decree went out in 457 B.C. and the rebuilding of the temple and the wall was completed in 7 prophetic weeks (49 years) or 408 B.C.. Sixty two weeks more (483 years) reached to 27 A.D., the year Messiah was baptised and began His public ministry (Acts 10:38, Matt. 3:13-17). The crucifiction took place in the midst of the 70th week in 31 A.D. and was completed in 34 A.D. at the stoning of Stephen which symbolized the rejection of Christ by the Jewish people.
The remaining 1810 years brings us to 1844, the beginning date of the "Cleansing of the Sanctuary". This date marks the transition from the Holy Place (or daily ministration of the priests) to the Most Holy Place (the Day of Atonement ministration) and is the "Great Step" of Giza. It is here that Christ, our High Priest, entered the Most Holy Place on the anti-typical Day of Atonement in 1844 and where He presently pleads His blood as the true "Lord's goat" (Heb.7:25;10:4) before the Father and where He ALONE is privileged to speak the Sacred Name of YHWH.
We must heed the lesson II Chronicles 26:18... when the priests went in after King Uzziah, who had gone into the temple of the Lord to burn incense, they said to him....
"....It appertaineth not unto thee, Uzziah, to burn incense unto the Lord....neither shall it be for thine honour from the Lord God."
The Sacred Name of God, is still spoken on the Day of Atonement by the High Priest in Orthodox Judaism, a skill handed down from the sacred secret schools of the prophets; however, since this priesthood was done away with in 31 A.D., even their speaking it is an abomination and can be construed as "Taking God's Name in vain" (Exodus 20:7. The Day of Atonement service is being performed anti-typically by our "Great High Priest Christ" and it is HIS voice, and His alone, which is acceptable before YHWH in pleading His blood as an atonement for the spiritual children of the God of Israel.
"The secret things belong unto the Lord our God: but those things which are revealed belong to us and to our chhildren for ever, that we may do all the words of this law." (Deuteronomy 29:29)
"Be ye afraid of the sword: for wrath bringeth the punishments of the sword, that ye may know there is a judgement." (Job 19:29)
Jesus said "Follow me".
Shalom,
Stefree
|
|
|
David Merrill
Advanced Member
USA
1147 Posts |
Posted - 12 Jul 2005 : 10:10:39
|
Please correct me if I missed the point, but you are saying above:
quote:
It is here that Christ, our High Priest, entered the Most Holy Place on the anti-typical Day of Atonement in 1844 and where He presently pleads His blood as the true "Lord's goat" (Heb.7:25;10:4) before the Father and where He ALONE is privileged to speak the Sacred Name of YHWH. (emphasis added)
I agree. But He, corporate is us in Him. And by such agency that privilege is extended to us as priests and kings.
www.ecclesia.org/forum/images/suitors/72foldName.gif
http://friends-n-family-research.info/FFR/Merrill_72-weights.jpg
Otherwise I am glad you reminded me of that timeline. There were some wonderful revivals in this nation around that time. Being a historicist there are many typical timelines.
http://ecclesia.org/forum/images/suitors/DanielCalendar.jpg
Daniel's Calendar
http://ecclesia.org/forum/images/suitors/DanielBooks.jpg
Daniel's Books
http://ecclesia.org/forum/images/suitors/Scythian.jpg
Darius conquers Scythians
http://ecclesia.org/forum/images/suitors/Khazar.jpg
The Khazars convert
The timeline of the Week not on the timelines drawing is from 520 BC to 740 AD. 1260 years is half a Week. And 740 AD to 2000 AD is the second half of the Week. Corresponding to the same Daniel calendar.
Also I had not considered Cambysis capturing Pythagoras out of Egypt for twelve years into Babylon the source for Wonderful Numberer. Interestingly, Pythagoras being exposed to Babylonian technology would almost certainly mean under the prophet and chieftain of astrology and sorcery, Daniel. A good read on this is Numerology by Eric Temple BELL 1933. Thanks for bringing that to mind. Wonderful Numberer - Palmoni.
Regards,
David Merrill.
|
 |
|
|
stefree
Regular Member
USA
45 Posts |
Posted - 12 Jul 2005 : 20:50:57
|
David,
...you are correct about us being corporately in Christ, however, we are a "Royal" priesthood, whereas He is our only High Priest...and although there were many timelines and many "revivals" in 1888, there is only one "Cleansing of the Sanctuary" prophetic period corresponding with the "Great Step", or Christ's transition from the Holy to the Most Holy...I am not here to dictate your conscience...
Blessings,
stefree
|
|
|
|
Oneisraelite
Advanced Member
uSA
833 Posts |
Posted - 13 Jul 2005 : 14:09:39
|
Ah, Grasshopper, the journey of a million miles begins with but a single step...a very large step...but "A Step" indeed.
fellowcitizen of the commonwealth of Yisra'el,
NOT the man-made, fictional USA.
Ephesians 2:12 & 19
An act done by me against my will is not my act. |
Edited by - Oneisraelite on 13 Jul 2005 14:11:41 |
|
|
|
Walter
Advanced Member
USA
144 Posts |
Posted - 13 Jul 2005 : 21:48:49
|
I don't understand.
Numbers 6:
22* ¶ And the LORD spake unto Moses, saying,
23* Speak unto Aaron and unto his sons, saying, On this wise ye shall bless the children of Israel, saying unto them,
24* The LORD bless thee, and keep thee:
25* The LORD make his face shine upon thee, and be gracious unto thee:
26* The LORD lift up his countenance upon thee, and give thee peace.
27* And they shall put my name upon the children of Israel; and I will bless them.
Rev 1:6* And hath made us kings and priests unto God and his Father; to him be glory and dominion for ever and ever. Amen.
Rev 5:10 And hast made us unto our God kings and priests: and we shall reign on the earth.
When was this nullified? |
|
|
|
Oneisraelite
Advanced Member
uSA
833 Posts |
Posted - 14 Jul 2005 : 06:20:21
|
Perhaps these three items will help us understand, Walter…
"Religion has always loved to cloak itself in mystery, and a priesthood is notoriously averse from revealing in plain language the secrets of which it believes itself the possessor.
The priesthood of Babylonia formed no exception to the general rule...and the true pronunciation of devine names was carefully hidden from the uninitiated multitudes." ...from A.H. Sayce in his writing "Religion of the Ancient Babylonians," page 4.
Nomina si nescis perit cognitio rerum. If you know not the names of things, the knowledge of things themselves perishes. Co. Litt. 86. - Bouvier's 1856 Law Dictionary
Excerpt from the Secret Treaty of Varona [Nov. 22nd, 1822],
"ARTICLE 3. Convinced that the principles of religion contribute most powerfully to keep nations in the state of passive obedience which they owe to their princes, the high contracting parties declare it to be their intention to sustain in their respective states, those measures which the clergy may adopt with the aim of ameliorating their own interests, so intimately connected with the preservation of the authority of the princes; and the contracting powers join in offering their thanks to the Pope for what he has already done for them, and solicit his constant co?operation in their views of submitting the nations."
Not too long ago, the word superstition had to do with what we now call religion.
Superstition, n. [L. superstitio, supersto; super and sto, to stand.]
1. Excessive exactness or rigor in religious opinions or practice… Webster’s 1828 American Dictionary of the English Language
Then Paul stood in the midst of Mars' hill, and said, Ye men of Athens, I perceive that in all things ye are too superstitious [G1174]. For as I passed by, and beheld your devotions, I found an altar with this inscription, TO THE UNKNOWN [unidentified, nameless, anonymous] GOD. Whom therefore ye ignorantly worship, him declare I unto you.
Firstly, the word too was added to the Word of Yahuwâh by the pen of the lying scribes or translators; secondly, the word superstitious means, according to BDB, religious, not too religious.
G1174
deisidaimonesteros
Thayer Definition:
1) in a good sense
1a) reverencing god or the gods, pious, religious
2) in a bad sense
2a) superstitious
It is our studied opinion that the Scripture is not a book about religion, it is a book about government and right-living; it is the Instructions Manual for mankind (adam).
fellowcitizen of the commonwealth of Yisra'el,
NOT the man-made, fictional USA.
Ephesians 2:12 & 19
An act done by me against my will is not my act. |
Edited by - Oneisraelite on 14 Jul 2005 06:52:59 |
|
|
|
David Merrill
Advanced Member
USA
1147 Posts |
Posted - 14 Jul 2005 : 07:32:13
|
Dear Stefree;
Then I am to surmise that you warn the readers that Jesus Christ, the living God is actively intermediary and high priest in the sanctuary. Therefore the use of the Name is forbidden to us lower priests?
I disagree. That is superstition that developed around the Temple Mount for a relatively short period of time. I prefer the opinions general and mainstream and am enjoying The Name of God Y.eH.oW.aH Which is Pronounced as it is Written I_Eh_oU-Ah - Its Story by Gerard Gertoux. Which explains the history of the Name and its usage quite clearly. In general and proper context the Name is something to be revered and used at least once per day in the Shema (Hear 'O Israel, the Lord our God is One Lord), the basic tenet of monotheism. I am certain, and feel so in my heart, that for most of Israel's history there has been no substitution for the Name in that passage. Substitution with LORD and G-d etc. are a superstition among Babylonian Jews around a belief that people cannot be responsible for such a burden as speaking the Name of God into their own lives.
Regards,
David Merrill. |
|
|
|
BatKol
Advanced Member
USA
735 Posts |
Posted - 14 Jul 2005 : 18:37:02
|
David said: The Name of God Y.eH.oW.aH Which is Pronounced as it is Written I_Eh_oU-Ah - Its Story
Steve: I agree. From my studies of the language scholars this rendering is what seems to be the most accurate. |
|
|
|
Walter
Advanced Member
USA
144 Posts |
Posted - 14 Jul 2005 : 23:22:18
|
quote:
Originally posted by oneisraelite
It is our studied opinion that the Scripture is not a book about religion, it is a book about government and right-living; it is the Instructions Manual for mankind (adam).
Well I agree with this statement. I must be too dull to figure out how the rest of your post showed that Numbers 6:22-27 has been nullified by a competent authority. As we are kings and priests, we have the office to bless our children (if we have them) according to IAUE's ("God's") pattern. (Yes, I hold "the name" to be different than everyone else does.) |
|
|
|
Oneisraelite
Advanced Member
uSA
833 Posts |
Posted - 15 Jul 2005 : 07:03:53
|
Greetings and salutations Walter:
Peace be unto the house.
“I must be too dull to figure out how the rest of your post showed that Numbers 6:22-27 has been nullified by a competent authority.”
We fail to see where our post showed that as well…’bout as clear as mud…
As far as we can ascertain, Numbers 6:22-27 has not been nullified by a competent authority; it was nullified by religionists which did not, and do not, have properly delegated authority.
Neither do they which go by say, “The blessing of yod hey waw hey be upon you: we bless you in the name of yod hey waw hey”.
Evidently some form of the ineffable name doctrine may have been around in Dawid’s day as well. And, though the second one could be, and probably is, referring to authority, the first use of the name, in this verse, obviously is not.
Hey, Steven, my friend, it is good to “see” you…
As a student of the later Aramaic (Hebrew), i.e. with vowel-pointing, the so-called Hebrew language that was developed after the onset of the post-exilic Babylonian ineffable name doctrine, is it your learned opinion that it is safe to assume that this new language and its pronunciations, particularly in the case of the name above all names, are identical to the ancient Hebrew? If your answer is no to this question, we rest here. However, if your answer is yes to the above question, then we have these addition questions for you, if you do not mind.
If the first syllable is yeh, as you seem to be indicating:
(1) then the first hey has the sound of what we call, in English, the short-e sound, while the second hey has what we call the short-a sound?
(2) if this is correct, should we then be saying hallelu’yeh , as opposed to hallelu’yah (Gr. alleluia)?
(3) and, should Strong’s #H3050 (yod hey), the shortened form of the name, be pronounced yeh, as opposed to yaw, as Dr Strong indicated?
(4) or, is this “shortened form” somehow a combination of the first letter and last syllable of the name?
(5) and, if this is the fact of the matter, would my given name, Robert, be shortened to Rert, in Hebrew?
Thank you, in advance, for your time and attention to these five questions.
fellowcitizen of the commonwealth of Yisra'el,
NOT the man-made, fictional USA.
Ephesians 2:12 & 19
An act done by me against my will is not my act. |
Edited by - Oneisraelite on 15 Jul 2005 07:25:28 |
|
|
|
David Merrill
Advanced Member
USA
1147 Posts |
Posted - 15 Jul 2005 : 11:24:49
|
Rather than go around again about pronunciation. [I am confident that the experts and I have it correct.] We can stay on point. The point being the ineffible name doctrine. However one feels is the correct pronunciation, do we have the right to boldly say it? To use it in prayer, silent or aloud? That seems to be the question on this Topic.
For instance I consider Stefree a practicing Jew. Maybe a "completed" or Messianic Jew. But likely not. He is a Jew extending an ineffible name doctrine warning to Christians. That is a first-glance off the hip impression. There may be other reasons why he extends his warning.
One of the suitors is a Qabbalist. Not the Hollywood style. After some time he decided to present some of the process to his rabbi. Now he does not agree with the process. He is in Diaspora (the dispersion of the Am, the people out into the Gentile nations). The docrines conflict. Jeremiah and Daniel dictate that one is to accomodate the laws of the land where you live, while in diaspora. So he had to choose one or the other. Christianity being a new sect of Judaism dictates the same at Romans 13 albeit there is a lot of argument about that.
Regards,
David Merrill.
|
Edited by - David Merrill on 15 Jul 2005 11:30:59 |
|
|
|
BatKol
Advanced Member
USA
735 Posts |
Posted - 15 Jul 2005 : 11:55:15
|
Greetings brother Robert and family!
From my studies on Hebrew it seems there are a few opinions as to pronunciations. The Jews who invented the vowel system we use now will say that it is authentic. This is the system I learned but I have no way of personally confirming their accuracy. I just took the course and can read the Massoretic text. The debate continues to this day as to the Jew's accuracy. The reason that I tend to agree with David on this is Dr. Magee, a researcher I have been respecting quite a bit these days, uses Y.eH.oW.aH type pronunciation. His research, to me, is amazing and I find his speculations plausable. If his rendering of the Name reflects the same skill as his other research, I'd have to cast my vote with him. Personally, I have heard of folks getting 'great results' using the name "Father!" so your milage may vary on this item!
My best to all,
Steve |
|
|
|
David Merrill
Advanced Member
USA
1147 Posts |
Posted - 15 Jul 2005 : 23:11:06
|
Back on the same argument. Silly.
So get on point of the warning, would you?
If you want to argue about the pronunciations, I got you.
|
Edited by - David Merrill on 15 Jul 2005 23:12:03 |
|
|
|
Oneisraelite
Advanced Member
uSA
833 Posts |
Posted - 16 Jul 2005 : 08:38:45
|
Silly, a. [Heb. This may be radically the same word, with a prefix. Class Sl. No. 26] 1. Weak in intellect; foolish; witless; destitute of ordinary strength of mind; simple; as a silly man; a silly child. – Webster’s 1828 American Dictionary of the English Language
Ineffable, a. [L. ineffabilis; in and effabilis, from effor, to speak.] Unspeakable; unutterable; that cannot be expressed in words… (Ibid.)
It is precisely because of the so-called ineffable name doctrine that we are even having this discussion of the correct pronunciation of the Proper Name of the Supreme Suveran; they are directly related. And though you may deem it "silly" David Merrill, there is apparently Someone who does not!
How long shall this be in the heart of the prophets that prophesy lies? yea, they are prophets of the deceit of their own heart; Which think to cause my people to forget my name by their dreams which they tell every man to his neighbour, as their fathers have forgotten my name for Baal (LORD).
For then will I turn to the people a pure language, that they may all call upon the name of yod hey waw hey, to serve him with one consent.
The three vowel letters used in the sacred name reflect these following inflections (See footnote 23):
The yod could indicate ee, ay or eh.
The hey could indicate ah, eh or ay.
The waw could indicate oo or aw.
Note well that from three different books (witnesses) on Hebrew grammar that the waw does not indicate the sound of ow.
The Form “Yahu”
The name yod hey (Yah) is also often found under its longer form yod hey waw (Yahu). Since this form represents the first three letters of the sacred name, and the first two syllables, it further aids us in recovering the correct pronunciation for yod hey waw hey. The yod hey waw (yahu) ending, by the way, is often used for an individual whose name elsewhere end with yod hey (yah) (See footnote 57). We also find that names using yod hey waw in the Masoretic text are vowel pointed by the Jewish scribes, in an effort to disguise the sacred name, to read Yeho, while the same Yahwistic names in the Murasû text, written at Nippur in the fifth century B.C.E., are written Yahu. For example, the Masoretic Text has Yeho-zabad and Yeho-nathan, while the Murasû text renders these names as Yahu-zaba and Yahu-natanu (See footnote 58). This fact brings us to a most interesting fact. Yod hey (Yah) was anciently pronounced yod hey waw (Yahu), the hey being understood as hey waw. This fact is immediately recognized once we compare those names which begin with Yahu against those names which end with Yahu. …
The Jewish scribes of the Middle Ages took effort to disguise the name Yahu by adding to it the vowel points for adonai. This technique was especially used in those cases where the name yod hey waw formed the beginning of a personal name, e.g. yod hey waw shiyn ayin (Yahu-shua), which was altered to [the one Strong’s shows, i.e. with vowel points] (Yeho-shua)…
To repeat: the Masoretic text are vowel pointed by the Jewish scribes, in an effort to disguise the sacred name, to read Yeho
Anyone wishing to read this chapter in its entirety may go here http://www.yahweh.org/publications/sny/sn09Chap.pdf
2nd Witness:
The vowel substitution was originally made by the Masoretes as a direction to substitute Adhonai for "the ineffable name." European students of Heb. took this literally, which yielded L. JeHoVa (first attested in writings of Galatinus, 1516). – http://www.etymonline.com/index.php?term=Jehovah
The (Masoretes’) vowel substitution…yielded L. JeHoVa, that is to say Yeho.
Footnotes:
(23) Marks, John H., and Rogers, Virgil M. A Beginner’s Handbook to Biblical Hebrew. Abingdon, Nashville, 1958, p 7; Horowitz, Edward. How the Hebrew Language Grew. Jewish Education Committee Press, 1960, pp 333f; Weingreen, J. A Practical Grammar for Classical Hebrew. Clarendon Press, 1939, pp 6f
(57) Zeitschrift Für Die Alttestamentliche Wissenschaft, 46, pp 7-25. For example, Mik Yah [SEC. Heb. #4320] is also found as Mik Yahu [SEC. Heb. #4321]…
(58) Coogan, Michael David. West Semitic Personal Names in Murasû Documents. Scholars Press, Missoula, Montana, 1976, pp 1-62
fellowcitizen of the commonwealth of Yisra'el,
NOT the man-made, fictional USA.
Ephesians 2:12 & 19
An act done by me against my will is not my act. |
Edited by - Oneisraelite on 18 Jul 2005 08:17:58 |
|
|
|
David Merrill
Advanced Member
USA
1147 Posts |
Posted - 16 Jul 2005 : 08:47:02
|
Foolish: You wish to waste more time and memory on the topic.
You have been proven wrong OneIsraelite. Proven wrong about your pronunciation of the Name so many ways. Therefore I will not be spending more archival space on the matter.
The subject matter here is right to speak the Name, regardless of the pronunciation.
Regards,
David Merrill.
|
Edited by - David Merrill on 16 Jul 2005 08:49:08 |
|
|
|
Oneisraelite
Advanced Member
uSA
833 Posts |
Posted - 16 Jul 2005 : 09:04:35
|
Glad to hear it.
fellowcitizen of the commonwealth of Yisra'el,
NOT the man-made, fictional USA.
Ephesians 2:12 & 19
An act done by me against my will is not my act. |
|
|
|
I. Scriabin
Senior Member
USA
62 Posts |
Posted - 16 Jul 2005 : 22:21:59
|
Brother Bob,
Ye may be on the right track there afterall.
However; be not concerned if some offer resistance to what you have found to be truth. It is a sign of the times we are in as we near the great day of calamity. The first nine chapters of the Proverbs of Solomon pretty well sum it up.
The name does have a grand and wonderful meaning to be sure. And of course, there will be differences in pronunciation due to geographical considerations of dialect and language, until the full truth is made manifest. It's all part of our testing.
Who is the one with his sizable band of followers who wish that the name would be forever banished and concealed from humankind upon the earth? He and his gang have a limited amount of time to work their mischief and even now the truth is slowly emerging as promised.
Though it may not always be readily apparent, we're in very good hands and the news is very good!!
Our Father and His firstborn Son of all creation see all that we do, no matter our allegiance, and probably even get a good chuckle from time to time as we struggle.
Keep on keepin' on...
|
|
|
|
Manuel
Advanced Member
USA
762 Posts |
Posted - 16 Jul 2005 : 23:13:09
|
Yes sireebob, without offense :),
Remember the old permanent hairdoos many loved, often leaving split ends? Well, styles and formats of these days have not changed either, still leaving split ends. Many still try to iron the wrinkles on frabics, but eventually those wrinkles creep back on. And writting of flattening out lies, you think a 7 mil thick layer of starch would make the undergarments more presentable?
Yes, times are-a-changing, and Father is using a curling iron on the tongues of the deceptive ones, and stiffed necks too!
|
|
|
|
Oneisraelite
Advanced Member
uSA
833 Posts |
Posted - 17 Jul 2005 : 06:40:51
|
Greetings and salutations, brother Hugh:
Peace be unto the house.
“Ye may be on the right track there afterall.”
Though I am not called "Bob", I will, for the moment, presume, with no offense taken, that you are speaking to me, and thank you for saying that we "may be on the right track".
If indeed you are speaking to me, we remind everyone once more, we are not saying that we are right and everyone or anyone else is wrong in this; what we are saying is, "this is some of the evidence we have thus far unearthed that sends us in this direction". We have changed our stance on this, and many, many other issues before, and may well again, if solid evidence indicates that the truth lies elsewhere.
It may even be, as some claim, that the Proper Name of our Supreme Suveran doesn’t matter one yod, but to our eyes (perception), the Scriptural evidence strongly indicates otherwise.
We further put forth, that it must be of some import to the synagogue of satan also for it to have put forth the tremendous effort it has in trying to eliminate it.
In the final analysis, let us all be seekers of the truth, and ready to accept it when and if we find it, irrespective of the cost.
fellowcitizen of the commonwealth of Yisra'el,
NOT the man-made, fictional USA.
Ephesians 2:12 & 19
An act done by me against my will is not my act. |
Edited by - Oneisraelite on 17 Jul 2005 08:22:58 |
|
|
|
Oneisraelite
Advanced Member
uSA
833 Posts |
Posted - 17 Jul 2005 : 07:19:48
|
Greetings and salutations brother Manuel:
Peace be unto you and yours, my brother.
"Yes, times are-a-changing, and Father is using a curling iron on the tongues of the deceptive ones, and stiffed necks too!"
brother Robert: <~~~ <hugging my sides, rolling on the floor laughing> Let us fervently pray that we are never found to be “deceptive ones” or "stiffed necks"…e-w-w-w-w, “a curling iron on the tongues”, that sounds painful!!
Our prayers, as always, go with you and yours, brother.
fellowcitizen of the commonwealth of Yisra'el,
NOT the man-made, fictional USA.
Ephesians 2:12 & 19
An act done by me against my will is not my act. |
Edited by - Oneisraelite on 17 Jul 2005 08:05:19 |
|
|
|
David Merrill
Advanced Member
USA
1147 Posts |
Posted - 17 Jul 2005 : 13:17:25
|
quote:
The name does have a grand and wonderful meaning to be sure. And of course, there will be differences in pronunciation due to geographical considerations of dialect and language, until the full truth is made manifest.
Gerard Gertoux writes that the Name may have been pronounced Yahuwah by the Egyptians. But there is just not enough evidence supporting how the hieroglyphs were vocalized.
There is a Topic called The Name of God. I apologize to you OneIsraelite for trying to keep the discussion on the warning here. People will talk about what we find entertaining and interesting; not what I say to.
Regards,
David Merrill. |
Edited by - David Merrill on 17 Jul 2005 13:18:23 |
|
|
|
Topic |
|
|
|
The Sacred Name of YHWH - Warning
