Jump to content


-


Photo
- - - - -

Yehovah


19 replies to this topic

#1 Daystar

Daystar

    Member

  • Advanced Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 4,492 posts

Posted 03 March 2004 - 08:10 PM

There is a deep significanc in the meaning of Yehovah, or Jehovah. Yehovah is a combination of three hebrew words which can be translated into English as follows:

"Yehi," which means "he will be."
"Hove," which means "(he is) being."
Hahyah, which means "he was."

Yehovah is formed by taking "Yeh," (from Yehi), "ov" (from hove), and "ah" (from hahyah). So Yehovah means, "I was, I am, I will be." There are seven web sites that deal with "yehi, hove, hahyah."

The botton line is that God (Yehovah) is "I am," just what Jesus claimed to be (John 8:58)

#2 Naziri

Naziri

    www.fitriyyah.org

  • Banned
  • 1,823 posts
  • Location:A thought within the Mind...

Posted 03 March 2004 - 08:16 PM

Unfortunately for your pointless argument, Eheyeh is the Name you are attempting to link with `Isa's (as) statement that he existed before Ibrahim (as).

As i have pointed out numerous times, the GREEK says only "Before Abraham existed, i existed." It is the man-made innovation of translators and propagandizers of the Paulian myth-making, that have made this "I AM."

Unfortunately for them "I AM" is not the meaning of "Eheyeh." Musa (as) was not told "I AM THAT I AM" when he was told "Eheyeh Asher Eheyeh." He was told "I WILL BE THAT I WILL BE."

Are you attempting to say that `Isa (as) said "Before Abraham was, I WILL BE?" That makes no sense at all; grammatically or otherwise.

Once again your linguistic ignorance has been your undoing.

Moreover, "Yehovah" is absolutely NOT how you pronounce Ha'Shem. Thanks for playing.

#3 Daystar

Daystar

    Member

  • Advanced Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 4,492 posts

Posted 03 March 2004 - 10:03 PM

As i have pointed out numerous times, the GREEK says only "Before Abraham existed, i existed." It is the man-made innovation of translators and propagandizers of the Paulian myth-making, that have made this "I AM."

[day] Peter also declared the deity of Jesus (2 Pet. 1:1). Did you want to include him with Paul the Propagandist? You could call his doctine Peterian Propaganda. Also, Jude declared the diety of Jesus 1:4.

[Day] Regardless what people say about I AM (ego eimi), it should be patently clear that Jesus was declaring himself to be God. Why do you think the Jews tried to stone him after he said it?

Unfortunately for them "I AM" is not the meaning of "Eheyeh."

[Day] Hayah (Eheyeh) simply means "to be, exist." But Yehovah still means "was, is, will be." Make it simple and call him I AM.

Musa (as) was not told "I AM THAT I AM" when he was told "Eheyeh Asher Eheyeh." He was told "I WILL BE THAT I WILL BE."

[Day] Hayah simply means to be, exist. If God is, he is I AM.

Are you attempting to say that `Isa (as) said "Before Abraham was, I WILL BE?"

[Day] No, I am attempting to say what the scripture clearly says - I AM. If the Jews understood Jesus to say "I will be," or something other than I AM, they wouldn't have tried to stone him. They knew very well what he was saying, just as they did in John 5:18 and 10:33.

That makes no sense at all; grammatically or otherwise.

[Day] Your denial of the deity of Jesus forces you to seek alternative explanations for the truth who Jesus said he was- the Alpha and Omega, "the Almighty." (Rev. 1:8,17; 22:13,16)

Once again your linguistic ignorance has been your undoing.

Moreover, "Yehovah" is absolutely NOT how you pronounce Ha'Shem. Thanks for playing.

[Day] There are literally dozens of names applied to God. Jews call him Hashem, we call him the Almighty God, which he said he was. The day will come when every knee will bow to the Lord Jesus Christ (Isa. 45:23, Rom. 14:11, Phil. 2:10,11).

#4 Naziri

Naziri

    www.fitriyyah.org

  • Banned
  • 1,823 posts
  • Location:A thought within the Mind...

Posted 03 March 2004 - 10:23 PM

As i have pointed out numerous times, the GREEK says only "Before Abraham existed, i existed." It is the man-made innovation of translators and propagandizers of the Paulian myth-making, that have made this "I AM."

[day] Peter also declared the deity of Jesus (2 Pet. 1:1). Did you want to include him with Paul the Propagandist? You could call his doctine Peterian Propaganda. Also, Jude declared the diety of Jesus 1:4.


i have explained before that Peter WAS NOT the author of the psuedepigraphical Books of "Peter." Below is what i have said:

Peter did not write the Books attributed to him. In fact the writing style in the so-called Books of Peter are IDENTICAL to the writing style of Paul. This should not surprise us since the Books praise Paul unceasingly.

Many scholars think 1 Peter is pseudepigraphic, since "Babylon" (5:13) is not used until after 70 C.E., and since the Greek is much too good for a simple Galilean fisherman.

Moreover, Silvanus is the scribe of 1 Peter (5:12). This could well mean that he is the author himself. Silvanus was a missionary associate of Paul, whom he tried to infiltrait the Jerusalem community with. Silvanus is the same person named "Silas" in Acts is always called "Silvanus" in Paul's letters exclusively; thus indicating the PAUL and not Peter is the origin of these Pseudepigraphic books of "Peter."

Beyond that, Mark is called "my son" in 1 Peter 5:13, yet he had no such connection with Peter, as he did with PAUL, as one of Paul's disciples.

Regardless of the identity of the author (which is logically not Peter), i ask you, is it Just for a man to rape a child, and then for that child's parents to forgive the rapist, but ONLY by first shedding the blood of the child? This is not justice, this notion of vicarious atonement is perverse, pagan and satanic in origin.

Moreover, Jesus spoke of there being no greater love than someone laying down their life for their friends. i'm sure no Muslim would disagree with that. i love my wife so much that i would die for her, i would take a bullet in her place. i love my children so much that i would do the same. As a matter of fact, i would undergo torture for them. i have various friends who i would die for, who i would suffer for in their place as well. This is not uncommon. This is TRUE friendship and TRUE love. Jesus did NOT say that he came to die, or that he would lay down his life for the world. He was saying that he loved his friends so much that he would face death to avert the persecution that they were facing as outlaws; by making Rome think that their leader had died.

[Day] Regardless what people say about I AM (ego eimi), it should be patently clear that Jesus was declaring himself to be God. Why do you think the Jews tried to stone him after he said it?


i have explained this many times. They tried to stone him because he claimed pre-existence. This is for the same reason that a Wahhabi or Deobandi would try to kill a Muslim for saying the same thing.

Unfortunately for them "I AM" is not the meaning of "Eheyeh."

[Day] Hayah (Eheyeh) simply means "to be, exist." But Yehovah still means "was, is, will be." Make it simple and call him I AM.


What you say is simply not true. i could explain to you the meaning of Ha'Shem (YHWH), but you will first have to acknowledge that your pronunciation of it is completely wrong.

Moreover, "hayah" (HYH) is not "Eheyeh" (AHYH).

Musa  was not told "I AM THAT I AM" when he was told "Eheyeh Asher Eheyeh." He was told "I WILL BE THAT I WILL BE."

[Day] Hayah simply means to be, exist. If God is, he is I AM.


You are speaking non-sense. Christian translations of the Tanakh say "I AM" for Eheyeh, when in fact this means "I will be." Do not make excuses for this incorrect translation.

Are you attempting to say that `Isa  said "Before Abraham was, I WILL BE?"

[Day] No, I am attempting to say what the scripture clearly says - I AM.


The Scriptures DO NOT say this, they say "Eheyeh" which means "i will be." You do not know Hebrew, so you are essentially lying when you pretend to know the definitions of words that you do not in fact know.

If the Jews understood Jesus to say "I will be," or something other than I AM, they wouldn't have tried to stone him. They knew very well what he was saying, just as they did in John 5:18 and 10:33.


Incorrect. Refer to my answer earlier in this reply.

That makes no sense at all; grammatically or otherwise.

[Day] Your denial of the deity of Jesus forces you to seek alternative explanations for the truth who Jesus said he was- the Alpha and Omega, "the Almighty." (Rev. 1:8,17; 22:13,16)


It is no "alternative explanation" to refer back to the ORIGINAL languages of the Bible and point out that no such thing as what you are claiming is said!

Once again your linguistic ignorance has been your undoing.

Moreover, "Yehovah" is absolutely NOT how you pronounce Ha'Shem. Thanks for playing.

[Day] There are literally dozens of names applied to God. Jews call him Hashem

,

Ha'Shem just means "The Name" and refers to the "Name" (Shem) "YHWH."

#5 Daystar

Daystar

    Member

  • Advanced Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 4,492 posts

Posted 04 March 2004 - 07:29 PM

[QUOTE]As i have pointed out numerous times, the GREEK says only "Before Abraham existed, i existed." It is the man-made innovation of translators and propagandizers of the Paulian myth-making, that have made this "I AM."

[day] Peter also declared the deity of Jesus (2 Pet. 1:1). Did you want to include him with Paul the Propagandist? You could call his doctine Peterian Propaganda. Also, Jude declared the diety of Jesus 1:4. [/QUOTE]

i have explained before that Peter WAS NOT the author of the psuedepigraphical Books of "Peter." Below is what i have said:

[Day] Ok, so whoever wrote it said that Jesus is God :-)

Peter did not write the Books attributed to him. In fact the writing style in the so-called Books of Peter are IDENTICAL to the writing style of Paul. This should not surprise us since the Books praise Paul unceasingly.

[Day] Denial always finds a reason not to believe.

Many scholars think 1 Peter is pseudepigraphic,

[Day] I have to chuckle when I hear "many scholars." Who are they? How many are there? What else don't they believe? Why don't you believe the greater number of scholars who disagree with them? Personally, I think these scholars whom you mention were foreknown by scripture, "always learning, but never able to acknowlege the truth." (2 tim. 3:7) as they lead their flock down the broad path of destruciton. We call such men "liberal" because they don't hold fast to sound doctrine, rather distort and twist the scriptures to suit their desires. Unfortunatley, they have a large following and tickle their ears with things they want to hear. Scripture records a just and tormenting end for their foolishness.

since "Babylon" (5:13) is not used until after 70 C.E., and since the Greek is much too good for a simple Galilean fisherman.

[Day] Not used by who? Simpletons don't use greek?

Moreover, Silvanus is the scribe of 1 Peter (5:12). This could well mean that he is the author himself. Silvanus was a missionary associate of Paul, whom he tried to infiltrait the Jerusalem community with. Silvanus is the same person named "Silas" in Acts is always called "Silvanus" in Paul's letters exclusively; thus indicating the PAUL and not Peter is the origin of these Pseudepigraphic books of "Peter."

[Day] So because you think Silas is Sylvanus, Paul now becomes the author of Peter's letters? What do you do with 2 Pet. 3:15? "Bear in mind that our Lord' patience means salvation, just as our dear brother PAUL wrote you with the wisdom God gave him."

Beyond that, Mark is called "my son" in 1 Peter 5:13, yet he had no such connection with Peter, as he did with PAUL, as one of Paul's disciples.

[Day] Peter and Mark were co-laborers in the Kingdom of God and Mark was probably influenced by the power and authority of Peter's walk with Jesus and his own ministry. In this sense, he may have referred to Mark as, "my son." Jesus referred to John as his mother's son (John 19:26), yet there was no connection between them. He was telling Mary and John to treat each other as though they were mother and son, because Jesus was departing.

Regardless of the identity of the author (which is logically not Peter),

[Day] Again, let's agree that Peter was not the author. Will you then accept what the real author said about the deity of Jesus in 2 Pet. 1:1?

i ask you, is it Just for a man to rape a child, and then for that child's parents to forgive the rapist, but ONLY by first shedding the blood of the child? This is not justice, this notion of vicarious atonement is perverse, pagan and satanic in origin.

[Day] Was it just for the Jews to kill innocent lambs as sacrifices for their sins?

Moreover, Jesus spoke of there being no greater love than someone laying down their life for their friends. i'm sure no Muslim would disagree with that.

[Day] Now perhaps you understand what Jesus ment when he said he lays down his life for his friends :-)

i love my wife so much that i would die for her,

[Day] I think you're beginning to get it :-) See how much Jesus loves you?

i would take a bullet in her place.

[Day] Do you not see what you are saying? Jesus took "the bullet" for all of us.

i love my children so much that i would do the same. As a matter of fact, i would undergo torture for them.

[Day] "His appearance was marred beyond that of any man and his form marred beyond human likeness." (Isa. 52:14)

have various friends who i would die for, who i would suffer for in their place as well. This is not uncommon. This is TRUE friendship and TRUE love. Jesus did NOT say that he came to die,

[Day] You will have to "torture" scripture beyond recognition to say that Jesus never said he would die. I won't waste our time by listing the many places where he said he would die. Besides, you know where they are.

or that he would lay down his life for the world. He was saying that he loved his friends so much that he would face death to avert the persecution that they were facing as outlaws; by making Rome think that their leader had died.

[Day] I am going to refer you to "Torturer in Chief." No one can twist and distort scripture to mean what it doesn't say as well as you can. You get the Blue Ribbon :-)

[QUOTE][Day] Regardless what people say about I AM (ego eimi), it should be patently clear that Jesus was declaring himself to be God. Why do you think the Jews tried to stone him after he said it?[/QUOTE]

i have explained this many times.

[Day] and that many times you torture the scriptures.

They tried to stone him because he claimed pre-existence.

[Day] Well, we could say that he was God if he pre-existed. But you really know better. The Jews woudn't want him dead just because he said that he lived before Abraham. They would have just laughed at him for saying something so stupid. Use your REASON, man!

This is for the same reason that a Wahhabi or Deobandi would try to kill a Muslim for saying the same thing.

[Day] If a Muslim said Jesus was God, the Wahhaibs would try to kill him?

[Day] Hayah (Eheyeh) simply means "to be, exist." But Yehovah still means "was, is, will be." Make it simple and call him I AM. [/QUOTE]

What you say is simply not true.

[Day] You are wrong, Naziri. It is simply true.

i could explain to you the meaning of Ha'Shem (YHWH), but you will first have to acknowledge that your pronunciation of it is completely wrong.

[Day] What does pronunciation have to do with anything.

Moreover, "hayah" (HYH) is not "Eheyeh" (AHYH).

[QUOTE]Musa was not told "I AM THAT I AM" when he was told "Eheyeh Asher Eheyeh." He was told "I WILL BE THAT I WILL BE."

[Day] Hayah simply means to be, exist. If God is, he is I AM. [/QUOTE]

You are speaking non-sense. Christian translations of the Tanakh say "I AM" for Eheyeh, when in fact this means "I will be."

[Day] No it doesn't. Hahyah and eimi simply mean "be, exist." Their definition does not automatically imply "I will." But again, let's say you're right. Why would the Jews want to kill Jesus for saying "I will be?"

[Day] No, I am attempting to say what the scripture clearly says - I AM. [/QUOTE]

The Scriptures DO NOT say this, they say "Eheyeh" which means "i will be."

[Day] Sorry, hahyah means "to be, exist." Eimi ("am") is always preceded by ego ("I"). "Am" always presupposes "I."

You do not know Hebrew, so you are essentially lying when you pretend to know the definitions of words that you do not in fact know.

[Day] You only need to talk with greek scholars who will confirm the text which read "I Am."

[QUOTE]If the Jews understood Jesus to say "I will be," or something other than I AM, they wouldn't have tried to stone him. They knew very well what he was saying, just as they did in John 5:18 and 10:33.[/QUOTE]

Incorrect. Refer to my answer earlier in this reply.

[Day] No, you refer to what the language of the greek text reads. It's been that way for 2000 years and you suppose it isn't right. Give me a break :-)

[QUOTE]That makes no sense at all; grammatically or otherwise.

[Day] Ego eimi = I am. Read it and weep.

[Day] Your denial of the deity of Jesus forces you to seek alternative explanations for the truth who Jesus said he was- the Alpha and Omega, "the Almighty." (Rev. 1:8,17; 22:13,16)[/QUOTE]

It is no "alternative explanation" to refer back to the ORIGINAL languages of the Bible and point out that no such thing as what you are claiming is said!

[Day] I have a great idea. Why don't you write to the publishers of the KJV, NIV, NASB, etc. and inform them that the billions of copies of their Bibles that are in every counrty, have it wrong.

[QUOTE]Once again your linguistic ignorance has been your undoing.

[Day] Why not take me up on this challenge? I'm serious. Why not write any one of these publishers and present your case to them.

Moreover, "Yehovah" is absolutely NOT how you pronounce Ha'Shem. Thanks for playing.

[Day] There are literally dozens of names applied to God. Jews call him Hashem[/QUOTE],

Ha'Shem just means "The Name" and refers to the "Name" (Shem) "YHWH."

[Day] Like I said, just one of the many names for our great God and Savior, Jesus Christ :-). BTW, did you know that Hashem has feet, legs, hips, shoulders, arms, hands, fingers, eyes, mouth, ears, etc?

#6 Naziri

Naziri

    www.fitriyyah.org

  • Banned
  • 1,823 posts
  • Location:A thought within the Mind...

Posted 04 March 2004 - 07:45 PM

Just skimming through your response before i respond, FIRST answer this question: DO YOU KNOW HEBREW OR GREEK?

If the answer is no then please stop acting like you do and stop arguing with me about languages that you do not even know how to read in the first place.

You are not even pronouncing YHWH remotely correctly, nor are you defining it correctly. Similarly you think "I AM" is a Divine Name when the Name you are thinking of "Eheyeh" in fact means "I WILL BE." You have literally no idea what you are talking about, and it shows to anyone who knows an ounce of Hebrew.

Edited by Naziri, 04 March 2004 - 07:47 PM.


#7 Netzari

Netzari

    !האַק מיר נישט קיין טשײַניק

  • Advanced Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 1,514 posts
  • Location:Florida
  • Religion:Jewish/B'nei Noach
  • Interests:G-d. G-d is interesting.

Posted 04 March 2004 - 08:09 PM

Similarly you think "I AM" is a Divine Name when the Name you are thinking of "Eheyeh" in fact means "I WILL BE."

Yup :D . Ehye asher ehye -- I will be that which I will be.

Ahh, I love that story of Moses and the burning bush :wub: .


Shaloms.

Edited by Netzari, 04 March 2004 - 08:10 PM.


#8 Naziri

Naziri

    www.fitriyyah.org

  • Banned
  • 1,823 posts
  • Location:A thought within the Mind...

Posted 04 March 2004 - 08:44 PM

Similarly you think "I AM" is a Divine Name when the Name you are thinking of "Eheyeh" in fact means "I WILL BE."

Yup :D . Ehye asher ehye -- I will be that which I will be.

Ahh, I love that story of Moses and the burning bush :wub: .


Shaloms.

Exactly right, which is why Christians claiming that `Isa (as) said "Before Abraham was, I AM" (prin abraam genesqai egw eimi) makes no sense at all as an alleged claim of Divinity.

Edited by Naziri, 04 March 2004 - 08:45 PM.


#9 Daystar

Daystar

    Member

  • Advanced Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 4,492 posts

Posted 06 March 2004 - 09:18 AM

Just skimming through your response before i respond, FIRST answer this question: DO YOU KNOW HEBREW OR GREEK?

[Day] I don't have to know either. What you have to do is convince the translators and Publishers of the different Bible versions that they are wrong. I don't have to know how a car works to drive it. Just imagine how famous you would be by proving to the world that Jesus is not I AM, God Almighty.

If the answer is no then please stop acting like you do and stop arguing with me about languages that you do not even know how to read in the first place.

[Day] OK, just convince these publishers that they are wrong.

You are not even pronouncing YHWH remotely correctly, nor are you defining it correctly. Similarly you think "I AM" is a Divine Name when the Name you are thinking of "Eheyeh" in fact means "I WILL BE."

[Day] What do you think God "will be" that he already hasn't been, or is. "I the Lord do not change" (Mal. 3:6). "Jesus is the same yesterday, today and forever." (Heb. 13:8). When was yesterday?

#10 Naziri

Naziri

    www.fitriyyah.org

  • Banned
  • 1,823 posts
  • Location:A thought within the Mind...

Posted 06 March 2004 - 12:15 PM

Just skimming through your response before i respond, FIRST answer this question: DO YOU KNOW HEBREW OR GREEK?

[Day] I don't have to know either.


Then this should really be the end of the discussion. If you do not know languages, do not argue with someone who does regarding them.


What you have to do is convince the translators and Publishers of the different Bible versions that they are wrong.



They mistranslate DELIBERATELY. They KNOW they are wrong and NO JEWISH version of the Bible states what their translations say AT ALL. Ask any Jew about how different the Jewish translations of the Tanakh are from the Christians' "Old Testament" (so-called).

I don't have to know how a car works to drive it.


But you do have to know how a car works if you intend to argue with a mechanic about how a car works.

Just imagine how famous you would be by proving to the world that Jesus is not I AM, God Almighty.


i intend to do just that, although not for fame or personal glory whatsoever.

If the answer is no then please stop acting like you do and stop arguing with me about languages that you do not even know how to read in the first place.

[Day] OK, just convince these publishers that they are wrong.


That would be like convincing a mass murderer that he is killing people. These shaiyatin know what they are doing and they do it DELIBERATELY to DECIEVE; like their master Paul. Christian translators of the Bible cannot be taken as experts over JEWISH translators of the Tanakh who translate VERY differently than the Christian propagandists.

You are not even pronouncing YHWH remotely correctly, nor are you defining it correctly. Similarly you think "I AM" is a Divine Name when the Name you are thinking of "Eheyeh" in fact means "I WILL BE."

[Day] What do you think God "will be" that he already hasn't been, or is. "I the Lord do not change" (Mal. 3:6). "Jesus is the same yesterday, today and forever." (Heb. 13:8). When was yesterday?


You obviously do not understand what the Name means. "Eheyeh asher eheyeh" is a response to Musa (as) asking what the Name was. Allah replied "Eheye asher eheyeh." That Allah will be that which Allah will be, and it is not for Musa (as) to know or fathum beyond those Attributes that Allah gives him. In the same way he asked for Allah to manifest to him, but this too was unrealistic, and he only saw the vieled Small Face, (Zer Anpin as opposed to the Arikh Anpin).

#11 Netzari

Netzari

    !האַק מיר נישט קיין טשײַניק

  • Advanced Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 1,514 posts
  • Location:Florida
  • Religion:Jewish/B'nei Noach
  • Interests:G-d. G-d is interesting.

Posted 06 March 2004 - 02:08 PM

What do you think God "will be" that he already hasn't been, or is. "I the Lord do not change" (Mal. 3:6). "Jesus is the same yesterday, today and forever." (Heb. 13:8). When was yesterday?


Yes, Naziri is right. When God says "I will be that which I will be," he is basically saying that he is undefinable, and that Moses shouldn't worry about explaining him.

Salaam and Shalom.

#12 Daystar

Daystar

    Member

  • Advanced Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 4,492 posts

Posted 06 March 2004 - 05:10 PM

Just skimming through your response before i respond, FIRST answer this question: DO YOU KNOW HEBREW OR GREEK?

[Day] I don't have to know either.


Then this should really be the end of the discussion. If you do not know languages, do not argue with someone who does regarding them.

[Day] Wrong. I challenge you to take on the publishers who did the translations. If you convince them, you convince me. I have faith in their work, esp. the NASB. Prove to me I shouldn't.

What you have to do is convince the translators and Publishers of the different Bible versions that they are wrong.


They mistranslate DELIBERATELY. They KNOW they are wrong and NO JEWISH version of the Bible states what their translations say AT ALL.

[Day] Not even Jewish Translations agree on many verses. But you are wrong when you say that all verses of the English Bibles are ALL wrong when compared to Jewish Bibles. That is pure hype on your part.

Ask any Jew about how different the Jewish translations of the Tanakh are from the Christians' "Old Testament" (so-called).

[Day] In my two Jewish Bibles, I find far more agreement with English Bibles than disagreement. Where do you get the notion that they are so different?

Just imagine how famous you would be by proving to the world that Jesus is not I AM, God Almighty.


i intend to do just that, although not for fame or personal glory whatsoever.

[Day] I will watch for the headlines: NAZIRI PROVES A DEITYLESS JESUS. Bill O'Reilly will be the first to interview you :-) Should you, or anyone, satisfy Christians that Jesus isn't God, I will be the first to burn my Bibles, cancel my church membership, and then GO OUT AND LIVE LIKE THE DEVIL because there will be no judgment since Jesus isn't God.

If the answer is no then please stop acting like you do and stop arguing with me about languages that you do not even know how to read in the first place.

[Day] OK, just convince these publishers that they are wrong.


That would be like convincing a mass murderer that he is killing people. These shaiyatin know what they are doing and they do it DELIBERATELY to DECIEVE; like their master Paul. Christian translators of the Bible cannot be taken as experts over JEWISH translators of the Tanakh who translate VERY differently than the Christian propagandists.

[Day] Well, like I said, my two Jewish Bibles are quite similar to my three English Bibles. Concerning something important about doctrine, give me an example where Jewish Bibles differ from English Bibles.

You are not even pronouncing YHWH remotely correctly, nor are you defining it correctly. Similarly you think "I AM" is a Divine Name when the Name you are thinking of "Eheyeh" in fact means "I WILL BE."

[Day] What do you think God "will be" that he already hasn't been, or is. "I the Lord do not change" (Mal. 3:6). "Jesus is the same yesterday, today and forever." (Heb. 13:8). When was yesterday?


You obviously do not understand what the Name means. "Eheyeh asher eheyeh" is a response to Musa (as) asking what the Name was. Allah replied "Eheye asher eheyeh." That Allah will be that which Allah will be, and it is not for Musa (as) to know or fathum beyond those Attributes that Allah gives him. In the same way he asked for Allah to manifest to him, but this too was unrealistic, and he only saw the vieled Small Face, (Zer Anpin as opposed to the Arikh Anpin).

[Day] Veiled Small Face??? What are you talking about?

First, concerning Exo. 3:13,14, The NEW JPS TRANSLATION ACCORDING TO THE TRADITIONAL HEBREW TEXT says, "Moses said to God, 'When I come to the Israelites and say to them, 'the God of your fathers has sent me to you,' and they ask me, 'What is His name?' what shall I say to them?" And God said to Moses, 'Ehyeh ahser Ehyeh."

Notice that this version does not translate 'Ehyeh asher Ehyeh' into english in the text. But in a footnote below, it says the following: "The meaning of 'Ehyeh asher Ehyeh' is uncertain; variously translated "I am that I am," "I am who I am," "I will be what I will be." Others say, "I AM," or "I will be."

Second, my Jerusalem Bible is very similar. Verse 14 says, "And God said to Moshe, 'EHYEH ASHER EHYEH (I will ever be what I now am): and he said, 'thus shalt thou say to the children of Israel, EHYEH (I AM) has sent to me to you.

Here are two Jewish Bibles that find "I AM" completely acceptable.

#13 Naziri

Naziri

    www.fitriyyah.org

  • Banned
  • 1,823 posts
  • Location:A thought within the Mind...

Posted 06 March 2004 - 05:30 PM

Then this should really be the end of the discussion. If you do not know languages, do not argue with someone who does regarding them.

[Day] Wrong. I challenge you to take on the publishers who did the translations. If you convince them, you convince me. I have faith in their work, esp. the NASB. Prove to me I shouldn't.


i don't need to prove anything to you. i am not in the business of trying to prove to the arrogant that they are arrogant, and trying to prove to the die-hard disbeliever that they disbelieve. You can consult ANY - ANY - Hebrew DICTIONARY if you find what i am saying so unbelievable.

QUOTE 
What you have to do is convince the translators and Publishers of the different Bible versions that they are wrong.

They mistranslate DELIBERATELY. They KNOW they are wrong and NO JEWISH version of the Bible states what their translations say AT ALL

[Day] Not even Jewish Translations agree on many verses. But you are wrong when you say that all verses of the English Bibles are ALL wrong when compared to Jewish Bibles. That is pure hype on your part. .


i have three Jewish translations of the Tanakh and i have the Tanakh in Hebrew. NONE of these say what you claim they say.

Ask any Jew about how different the Jewish translations of the Tanakh are from the Christians' "Old Testament" (so-called).

[Day] In my two Jewish Bibles, I find far more agreement with English Bibles than disagreement. Where do you get the notion that they are so different?


What are the ISBN numbers of your Jewish Bibles and please quote me EXACTLY what they translate "Eheyeh Asher Eheyeh" as?

QUOTE 
Just imagine how famous you would be by proving to the world that Jesus is not I AM, God Almighty. 

i intend to do just that, although not for fame or personal glory whatsoever.

[Day] I will watch for the headlines: NAZIRI PROVES A DEITYLESS JESUS.


Stay tuned, the day WILL come; i'm still very young and have many years of combating your kufr and shirk left in me insha'Allah.

What i do not finish, my children will.

Bill O'Reilly will be the first to interview you :-)


Bill O'Reilly would have a heart attack after debating me for five minutes.

You are free to arrange a debate between me at your church. i will bring Muslims and you will bring Christians. i will debate your most educated paster or theologian.

Think of all the chances you will have to "win hearts for Christ!"

Should you, or anyone, satisfy Christians that Jesus isn't God, I will be the first to burn my Bibles, cancel my church membership, and then GO OUT AND LIVE LIKE THE DEVIL because there will be no judgment since Jesus isn't God.


There is ABSOLUTELY Judgment without ANYONE being God but THE ONE AND ONLY GOD, YHWH, who is Allah ta'ala and NO ONE ELSE.

In order to "satisfy Christians" then Christians must first at least LISTEN to what i am saying.

Thoreau said: "It takes two to speak the truth - one to speak, and another to hear."

Are you willing to hear? Are you willing to listen? Are you willing to read the texts that i have written? Please start with "The Greatest Story NEVER Told" at: http://www.taliyah.o...rucifixion.html and get back to me with your rebuttal BASED IN SCRIPTURE from the PROPHETS and NOT PAUL.

This should be an easy thing if the Bible REALLY says what you and your master Paul claim it says.

QUOTE 
If the answer is no then please stop acting like you do and stop arguing with me about languages that you do not even know how to read in the first place.

[Day] OK, just convince these publishers that they are wrong.


You have changed the argument from what the name mean to me writing to publishers. Many Jews have written to these publishers ALREADY to tell them that they are lying and mistranslating. One more Jewish Muslim writing to them will do no good.


That would be like convincing a mass murderer that he is killing people. These shaiyatin know what they are doing and they do it DELIBERATELY to DECIEVE; like their master Paul. Christian translators of the Bible cannot be taken as experts over JEWISH translators of the Tanakh who translate VERY differently than the Christian propagandists.

[Day] Well, like I said, my two Jewish Bibles are quite similar to my three English Bibles. Concerning something important about doctrine, give me an example where Jewish Bibles differ from English Bibles.


i have over a dozen times already on this forum. Nearly every so-called "Old Testament prophecy" about `Isa (as) is a fabrication and mistranslation. You have certainly read many of the times i have pointed this out on this forum and you can read them throughout the texts that i have written.

Please read what i have written if you sincerely are willing to consider a perspective other than the one you have been indoctrinated with. i do you the same courtesy, please do me the same.

QUOTE 
You are not even pronouncing YHWH remotely correctly, nor are you defining it correctly. Similarly you think "I AM" is a Divine Name when the Name you are thinking of "Eheyeh" in fact means "I WILL BE."

[Day] What do you think God "will be" that he already hasn't been, or is. "I the Lord do not change" (Mal. 3:6). "Jesus is the same yesterday, today and forever." (Heb. 13:8). When was yesterday?


Once again, i have explained what this means and you have skimmed over it. Even your fellow Christian has disagreed with you.

Moreover, if you acknowledge that YHWH does not change then why do you preach that He changed from Tanakh to Gospel? Why do you teach that the Torah and the Mitzvot are abrogated?


You obviously do not understand what the Name means. "Eheyeh asher eheyeh" is a response to Musa  asking what the Name was. Allah replied "Eheye asher eheyeh." That Allah will be that which Allah will be, and it is not for Musa  to know or fathum beyond those Attributes that Allah gives him. In the same way he asked for Allah to manifest to him, but this too was unrealistic, and he only saw the vieled Small Face, (Zer Anpin as opposed to the Arikh Anpin).

[Day] Veiled Small Face??? What are you talking about?


It's a matter that would be apparent to you if you knew as much about Hebrew and Judaic traditions as you claim to.

First, concerning Exo. 3:13,14, The NEW JPS TRANSLATION ACCORDING TO THE TRADITIONAL HEBREW TEXT says, "Moses said to God, 'When I come to the Israelites and say to them, 'the God of your fathers has sent me to you,' and they ask me, 'What is His name?' what shall I say to them?" And God said to Moses, 'Ehyeh ahser Ehyeh."

Notice that this version does not translate 'Ehyeh asher Ehyeh' into english in the text. But in a footnote below, it says the following: "The meaning of 'Ehyeh asher Ehyeh' is uncertain; variously translated "I am that I am," "I am who I am," "I will be what I will be." Others say, "I AM," or "I will be."


Then get a dictionary and look it up. Once again, you are arguing a language you don't even know with someone who does. This is the epidome of folly.

Second, my Jerusalem Bible is very similar. Verse 14 says, "And God said to Moshe, 'EHYEH ASHER EHYEH (I will ever be what I now am): and he said, 'thus shalt thou say to the children of Israel, EHYEH (I AM) has sent to me to you.

Here are two Jewish Bibles that find "I AM" completely acceptable.


Those wouldn't happen to be "Messianic Jewish" translations would they?

#14 Daystar

Daystar

    Member

  • Advanced Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 4,492 posts

Posted 06 March 2004 - 06:02 PM

What do you think God "will be" that he already hasn't been, or is. "I the Lord do not change" (Mal. 3:6). "Jesus is the same yesterday, today and forever." (Heb. 13:8). When was yesterday?


Yes, Naziri is right. When God says "I will be that which I will be," he is basically saying that he is undefinable, and that Moses shouldn't worry about explaining him.

[Day] I disagree. I think God is very defineable. Whatever the scriptures say about him basically define him. But we have been trying to determine what "hahyeh" really means. It isn't Exo. 3:13,14 that are the real issue, rather what Jesus ment when he said, "I AM." The greek (ego eimi), according to different scholars can mean "I AM," or "I WILL BE," I WILL BE WHAT I WILL BE." How about, "I am because I will be what I am and will be :-)

Salaam and Shalom.

#15 Daystar

Daystar

    Member

  • Advanced Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 4,492 posts

Posted 06 March 2004 - 07:00 PM

[Day] Not even Jewish Translations agree on many verses. But you are wrong when you say that all verses of the English Bibles are ALL wrong when compared to Jewish Bibles. That is pure hype on your part. .[/QUOTE]

i have three Jewish translations of the Tanakh and i have the Tanakh in Hebrew. NONE of these say what you claim they say.

[quote]Ask any Jew about how different the Jewish translations of the Tanakh are from the Christians' "Old Testament" (so-called).

[Day] In my two Jewish Bibles, I find far more agreement with English Bibles than disagreement. Where do you get the notion that they are so different?[/quote]

What are the ISBN numbers of your Jewish Bibles

[Day] THE NEW JPS TRANSLATION is ISBN# 0-8276-0252-9 (Cloth). My JERUSALEM BIBLE is published BY Koren Publishers in Jerusalem and doesn't have an ISBN.

and please quote me EXACTLY what they translate "Eheyeh Asher Eheyeh" as?

[Day] I did quote you them. Here they are again:

NEW JPS TRANSLATION - Exo. 3:13,14

Moses said to God, "When I come to the Israelites and say to them 'the God of your fathers has sent me to you,' and they ask me, 'What is His Name?' what shall I say to them?" And God said to Moses, "Ehyeh asher Ehyeh." He continued, "Thus shall you say to the Israelites, 'Ehyeh asher Ehyeh sent me to you."

The footnotes below say:
a. Meaning of Heb. uncertain; variously translated: "I AM that I AM, "I will be what I will be."
b. Others, "I AM," or "I will be."
c. the name YHWH (traditionally read Adonai "the LORD) is here associated with the root hayah "to be."

THE JERUSALEM BIBLE - Exo. 3:13,14

"And Moshe said to God, "Behold, when I come to the children of Yisra'el, and shall say to them, 'the God of your father has sent me to you; and they shall say to me, 'What is his name? what shall I say to them? And God said to Moshe, EHYEH ASHER EHYEH (I will ever be what I now am); and he said, 'Thus shalt thou say to the children of Yisra'el, 'Ehyeh (I AM) has sent me to you."

These verses basically agree with the KJV, NIV and NASB.

[quote]QUOTE 
Just imagine how famous you would be by proving to the world that Jesus is not I AM, God Almighty. 

i intend to do just that, although not for fame or personal glory whatsoever.

[Day] I will watch for the headlines: NAZIRI PROVES A DEITYLESS JESUS.[/quote]

Stay tuned, the day WILL come; i'm still very young and have many years of combating your kufr and shirk left in me insha'Allah.

[Day] Kufr and shirk left you in insha'Allah?

What i do not finish, my children will.

[Day] You remind me of the famous former atheist, Josh Mcdowell, whose mission in life was to disprove the resurrection. If anyone could have done it, it was he. He was a brilliant man who graduated summa cum laude. He spent thousands of hours searching and digging. In the process he got saved and has written books why the resurrection is one of the most probable facts of history. God has a sense of humor :-)

[quote]Bill O'Reilly will be the first to interview you :-)[/quote]

Bill O'Reilly would have a heart attack after debating me for five minutes.

[Day] You must be good....real good :-). But you're right. O'Reilly doesn't do well at all concerning religion.

You are free to arrange a debate between me at your church. i will bring Muslims and you will bring Christians. i will debate your most educated paster or theologian.

[Day] Hmmmm....Sounds interesting (at least to me). Where do you live?

Think of all the chances you will have to "win hearts for Christ!"

[Day] But not yours?

[quote]Should you, or anyone, satisfy Christians that Jesus isn't God, I will be the first to burn my Bibles, cancel my church membership, and then GO OUT AND LIVE LIKE THE DEVIL because there will be no judgment since Jesus isn't God.[/quote]

There is ABSOLUTELY Judgment without ANYONE being God but THE ONE AND ONLY GOD, YHWH, who is Allah ta'ala and NO ONE ELSE.

[Day] That God is the Father, the Son and the Holy Spirit.

In order to "satisfy Christians" then Christians must first at least LISTEN to what i am saying.

[Day] We are excellant listeners :-)

Thoreau said: "It takes two to speak the truth - one to speak, and another to hear."

Are you willing to hear? Are you willing to listen? Are you willing to read the texts that i have written? Please start with "The Greatest Story NEVER Told" at: http://www.taliyah.o...rucifixion.html and get back to me with your rebuttal BASED IN SCRIPTURE from the PROPHETS and NOT PAUL.

[Day] Excuse me! I will not leave Paul out. Jesus revealed things to him that are not in the gospels (Gal. 1:12). Nor will I leave out Peter, Jude, John, etc.

This should be an easy thing if the Bible REALLY says what you and your master Paul claim it says.

[Day] BTW, do you still think Paul wrote Peter?

[quote]QUOTE 
If the answer is no then please stop acting like you do and stop arguing with me about languages that you do not even know how to read in the first place.

[Day] OK, just convince these publishers that they are wrong.[/quote]

You have changed the argument from what the name mean to me writing to publishers. Many Jews have written to these publishers ALREADY to tell them that they are lying and mistranslating. One more Jewish Muslim writing to them will do no good.

[Day] Jewish Muslim? As for arguments, don't they always end up going off on tangents?

[quote]That would be like convincing a mass murderer that he is killing people. These shaiyatin know what they are doing and they do it DELIBERATELY to DECIEVE; like their master Paul. Christian translators of the Bible cannot be taken as experts over JEWISH translators of the Tanakh who translate VERY differently than the Christian propagandists.

[Day] Well, like I said, my two Jewish Bibles are quite similar to my three English Bibles. Concerning something important about doctrine, give me an example where Jewish Bibles differ from English Bibles.[/quote]

i have over a dozen times already on this forum. Nearly every so-called "Old Testament prophecy" about `Isa (as) is a fabrication and mistranslation. You have certainly read many of the times i have pointed this out on this forum and you can read them throughout the texts that i have written.

[Day] I don't know where you get your information, but you couldn't be more wrong. You should enroll in one of the Baptist seminaries and spend some time with these people.

Please read what i have written if you sincerely are willing to consider a perspective other than the one you have been indoctrinated with. i do you the same courtesy, please do me the same.

[day] What I will do is respond to specifics about the words of Jesus and Paul. I'm not going to read everything you have written and then respond to all of it.

[quote]QUOTE 
You are not even pronouncing YHWH remotely correctly, nor are you defining it correctly. Similarly you think "I AM" is a Divine Name when the Name you are thinking of "Eheyeh" in fact means "I WILL BE."

[Day] What do you think God "will be" that he already hasn't been, or is. "I the Lord do not change" (Mal. 3:6). "Jesus is the same yesterday, today and forever." (Heb. 13:8). When was yesterday?[/quote]

Once again, i have explained what this means and you have skimmed over it. Even your fellow Christian has disagreed with you.

Moreover, if you acknowledge that YHWH does not change then why do you preach that He changed from Tanakh to Gospel?

[day] We're talking about his substance and nature, not his name.

Why do you teach that the Torah and the Mitzvot are abrogated?

[Day] The Bible teaches it, not me. What do you think John ment when he said, "For the Law came through Moses; grace and truth came through Jesus Christ." (John 1:17)

[quote]You obviously do not understand what the Name means. "Eheyeh asher eheyeh" is a response to Musa  asking what the Name was. Allah replied "Eheye asher eheyeh." That Allah will be that which Allah will be, and it is not for Musa  to know or fathum beyond those Attributes that Allah gives him. In the same way he asked for Allah to manifest to him, but this too was unrealistic, and he only saw the vieled Small Face, (Zer Anpin as opposed to the Arikh Anpin).

[Day] Veiled Small Face??? What are you talking about?[/quote]

It's a matter that would be apparent to you if you knew as much about Hebrew and Judaic traditions as you claim to.

[quote]First, concerning Exo. 3:13,14, The NEW JPS TRANSLATION ACCORDING TO THE TRADITIONAL HEBREW TEXT says, "Moses said to God, 'When I come to the Israelites and say to them, 'the God of your fathers has sent me to you,' and they ask me, 'What is His name?' what shall I say to them?" And God said to Moses, 'Ehyeh ahser Ehyeh."

Notice that this version does not translate 'Ehyeh asher Ehyeh' into english in the text. But in a footnote below, it says the following: "The meaning of 'Ehyeh asher Ehyeh' is uncertain; variously translated "I am that I am," "I am who I am," "I will be what I will be." Others say, "I AM," or "I will be."[/quote]

Then get a dictionary and look it up. Once again, you are arguing a language you don't even know with someone who does. This is the epidome of folly.

[quote]Second, my Jerusalem Bible is very similar. Verse 14 says, "And God said to Moshe, 'EHYEH ASHER EHYEH (I will ever be what I now am): and he said, 'thus shalt thou say to the children of Israel, EHYEH (I AM) has sent to me to you.

Here are two Jewish Bibles that find "I AM" completely acceptable.[/quote]

Those wouldn't happen to be "Messianic Jewish" translations would they?

[Day] Definitely not!

#16 Naziri

Naziri

    www.fitriyyah.org

  • Banned
  • 1,823 posts
  • Location:A thought within the Mind...

Posted 06 March 2004 - 10:50 PM

[QUOTE][Day] Not even Jewish Translations agree on many verses. But you are wrong when you say that all verses of the English Bibles are ALL wrong when compared to Jewish Bibles. That is pure hype on your part. .[/QUOTE]

i have three Jewish translations of the Tanakh and i have the Tanakh in Hebrew. NONE of these say what you claim they say.


QUOTE
Ask any Jew about how different the Jewish translations of the Tanakh are from the Christians' "Old Testament" (so-called).

[Day] In my two Jewish Bibles, I find far more agreement with English Bibles than disagreement. Where do you get the notion that they are so different? [/QUOTE]

You mean in your "Jewish translations?" Do they have parallel Hebew text? The Torah is Hebrew, like the Qur'an is Arabic. There is no such thing as an "English Torah" there is only an "English translation of the Torah."

What are the ISBN numbers of your Jewish Bibles

[QUOTE][Day] THE NEW JPS TRANSLATION is ISBN# 0-8276-0252-9 (Cloth). My JERUSALEM BIBLE is published BY Koren Publishers in Jerusalem and doesn't have an ISBN. [/QUOTE]

You will notice that on Amazon.com the FIRST reviewer is a Christian. The second says the following: "A readable, but bad translation, August 22, 2000"

http://www.amazon.co...272949?v=glance

This confirms what i have said. It is a BAD translation. "Bad" here meaning "inaccurate."

and please quote me EXACTLY what they translate "Eheyeh Asher Eheyeh" as?

[QUOTE][Day] I did quote you them. Here they are again:

NEW JPS TRANSLATION - Exo. 3:13,14

Moses said to God, "When I come to the Israelites and say to them 'the God of your fathers has sent me to you,' and they ask me, 'What is His Name?' what shall I say to them?" And God said to Moses, "Ehyeh asher Ehyeh." He continued, "Thus shall you say to the Israelites, 'Ehyeh asher Ehyeh sent me to you."

The footnotes below say:
a. Meaning of Heb. uncertain; variously translated: "I AM that I AM, "I will be what I will be."
b. Others, "I AM," or "I will be."
c. the name YHWH (traditionally read Adonai "the LORD) is here associated with the root hayah "to be."

THE JERUSALEM BIBLE - Exo. 3:13,14[/QUOTE]

So again, they WILL NOT put "I AM" as the translation IN THE TEXT. If they were confident in their translation then they could do this. Since they KNOW that this is not the accepted Hebrew definition of the phrase, the will only include the phrase "I AM" in the footnotes.

From the Amazon reviews it seems very clear that they were trying to market to CHRISTIAN theologians, who the first reviewer CONFIRMS would NORMALLY not know much at all about Hebrew or Jewish translations.

You ALSO notice that the footnote DOES says "I WILL BE." The tenses are different and anyone who knows how to read Hebrew can tell that it is the future, not present tense.

To say "I AM" one would say "Ani."



[QUOTE]i intend to do just that, although not for fame or personal glory whatsoever.

[Day] I will watch for the headlines: NAZIRI PROVES A DEITYLESS JESUS.



Stay tuned, the day WILL come; i'm still very young and have many years of combating your kufr and shirk left in me insha'Allah.

[Day] Kufr and shirk left you in insha'Allah? [/QUOTE]

Kufr is disbelief in what Allah has revealed through the Prophets. Shirk is polytheism. BOTH are traits of your religion.

What i do not finish, my children will.

[QUOTE][Day] You remind me of the famous former atheist, Josh Mcdowell, whose mission in life was to disprove the resurrection.If anyone could have done it, it was he. He was a brilliant man who graduated summa cum laude. He spent thousands of hours searching and digging. In the process he got saved and has written books why the resurrection is one of the most probable facts of history. God has a sense of humor :-) [/QUOTE]

Yes Allah DOES have a sense of humor since Josh McDowell had the floor mopped up with himself by Ahmed Deedat in a public debate from what i have heard.


[QUOTE]QUOTE
Bill O'Reilly will be the first to interview you :-)

Bill O'Reilly would have a heart attack after debating me for five minutes.

[Day] You must be good....real good :-). But you're right. O'Reilly doesn't do well at all concerning religion. [/QUOTE]

i have noticed. He also doesn't do good debating many other things he is wrong about (not to mention him lying about awards that he NEVER in fact won at his previous job).

[QUOTE]You are free to arrange a debate between me at your church. i will bring Muslims and you will bring Christians. i will debate your most educated paster or theologian.

[Day] Hmmmm....Sounds interesting (at least to me). Where do you live?[/QUOTE]

i live in Cincinnati right now, but i'm moving to Southern California again. If your church could pay for a plane ticket (coach is fine), then i would be happy to travel to do this debate.

[QUOTE]Think of all the chances you will have to "win hearts for Christ!"

[Day] But not yours? [/QUOTE]

You forget how many years i have spent around Christianity, church, and Christian high school. i've literally heard it all and left my Christian teachers SPEECHLESS with the challenged and questions i have posed to them about Christianity. If Christianity was the Truth then rest assured i would have been Christian. Since it is not, i am not; and since it is a CALCULATED endevor to conceal the truth, i oppose it VEHEMENTLY.


[QUOTE]QUOTE
Should you, or anyone, satisfy Christians that Jesus isn't God, I will be the first to burn my Bibles, cancel my church membership, and then GO OUT AND LIVE LIKE THE DEVIL because there will be no judgment since Jesus isn't God.


There is ABSOLUTELY Judgment without ANYONE being God but THE ONE AND ONLY GOD, YHWH, who is Allah ta'ala and NO ONE ELSE.

[Day] That God is the Father, the Son and the Holy Spirit.[/QUOTE]

Prove it. Respond to my text "The Greatest Story NEVER Told." http://www.taliyah.o...rucifixion.html

[QUOTE]In order to "satisfy Christians" then Christians must first at least LISTEN to what i am saying.

[Day] We are excellant listeners :-)[/QUOTE]

i have NOT found this to be the case. Christians are GREAT at proselytizing, but NOT at considering that their dogma might be the least bit wrong. The fact that you cannot accept the simple fact that you are wrong about what "Eheyeh asher Eheyeh" means epidomizes this.

[QUOTE]Thoreau said: "It takes two to speak the truth - one to speak, and another to hear."

Are you willing to hear? Are you willing to listen? Are you willing to read the texts that i have written? Please start with "The Greatest Story NEVER Told" at: http://www.taliyah.o...rucifixion.html and get back to me with your rebuttal BASED IN SCRIPTURE from the PROPHETS and NOT PAUL.

[Day] Excuse me! I will not leave Paul out. Jesus revealed things to him that are not in the gospels (Gal. 1:12). Nor will I leave out Peter, Jude, John, etc. [/QUOTE]

Since PAUL is the only person you base this on and there are in fact no other witnesses to him supposedly having all of these theologically deviant concepts taught to him by "the ghost of Jesus past" then this is nothing but hearsay and must be disregarded.

If you want more evidence for why the Worthless Shepherd Paul is unreliable, read:

Paul: Apostle or Apostate?

http://www.taliyah.o...order=0&thold=0

The Worthless Shepherd

http://www.taliyah.o...order=0&thold=0

[QUOTE]This should be an easy thing if the Bible REALLY says what you and your master Paul claim it says.

[Day] BTW, do you still think Paul wrote Peter? [/QUOTE]

Peter did not write the Books attributed to him. In fact the writing style in the so-called Books of Peter are IDENTICAL to the writing style of Paul. This should not surprise us since the Books praise Paul unceasingly.

Many scholars think 1 Peter is pseudepigraphic, since "Babylon" (5:13) is not used until after 70 C.E., and since the Greek is much too good for a simple Galilean fisherman.

Moreover, Silvanus is the scribe of 1 Peter (5:12). This could well mean that he is the author himself. Silvanus was a missionary associate of Paul, whom he tried to infiltrait the Jerusalem community with. Silvanus is the same person named "Silas" in Acts is always called "Silvanus" in Paul's letters exclusively; thus indicating the PAUL and not Peter is the origin of these Pseudepigraphic books of "Peter."

Beyond that, Mark is called "my son" in 1 Peter 5:13, yet he had no such connection with Peter, as he did with PAUL, as one of Paul's disciples.

Regardless of the identity of the author (which is logically not Peter), i ask you, is it Just for a man to rape a child, and then for that child's parents to forgive the rapist, but ONLY by first shedding the blood of the child? This is not justice, this notion of vicarious atonement is perverse, pagan and satanic in origin.

Moreover, Jesus spoke of there being no greater love than someone laying down their life for their friends. i'm sure no Muslim would disagree with that. i love my wife so much that i would die for her, i would take a bullet in her place. i love my children so much that i would do the same. As a matter of fact, i would undergo torture for them. i have various friends who i would die for, who i would suffer for in their place as well. This is not uncommon. This is TRUE friendship and TRUE love. Jesus did NOT say that he came to die, or that he would lay down his life for the world. He was saying that he loved his friends so much that he would face death to avert the persecution that they were facing as outlaws; by making Rome think that their leader had died.

[QUOTE]You have changed the argument from what the name mean to me writing to publishers. Many Jews have written to these publishers ALREADY to tell them that they are lying and mistranslating. One more Jewish Muslim writing to them will do no good.

[Day] Jewish Muslim? As for arguments, don't they always end up going off on tangents?[/QUOTE]

You didn't go off on tangents, you actually changed what the argument was and never acknowledged error when you were proven to be in error. It doesn't make you foolish to acknowledge when you are wrong. It makes you foolish when you do not.

[QUOTE]i have over a dozen times already on this forum. Nearly every so-called "Old Testament prophecy" about `Isa is a fabrication and mistranslation. You have certainly read many of the times i have pointed this out on this forum and you can read them throughout the texts that i have written.

[Day] I don't know where you get your information, but you couldn't be more wrong. You should enroll in one of the Baptist seminaries and spend some time with these people. [/QUOTE]

i get my information from the Tanakh that you cannot read in its original language. i have no interest in enrolling somewhere where someone will tell me the Hebrew text does not say what it actually says.

[QUOTE]Please read what i have written if you sincerely are willing to consider a perspective other than the one you have been indoctrinated with. i do you the same courtesy, please do me the same.

[day] What I will do is respond to specifics about the words of Jesus and Paul. I'm not going to read everything you have written and then respond to all of it. [/QUOTE]

Why not? Are you really THAT busy that you can't take the time to read a text that details your opponents arguments against your religion? Aren't you interested in "winning" my "heart for Christ?"

Does the Bible not say that YOU ARE NOT YOUR OWN, YOU WERE BOUGHT AT A PRICE? You are acting like this is not your duty to try to convince me and other's here. Others here have read what i have written, and it has fortified their Iman, their Faith in Islam. If you wish to win us over then you will have to address what i have written sooner or later.

Besides, didn't you just get done saying what great listeners you Christians are?

[QUOTE]Once again, i have explained what this means and you have skimmed over it. Even your fellow Christian has disagreed with you.

Moreover, if you acknowledge that YHWH does not change then why do you preach that He changed from Tanakh to Gospel?

[day] We're talking about his substance and nature, not his name.

Why do you teach that the Torah and the Mitzvot are abrogated?

[Day] The Bible teaches it, not me. What do you think John ment when he said, "For the Law came through Moses; grace and truth came through Jesus Christ." (John 1:17)[/QUOTE]

This does not mean that because Grace was taught by `Isa (as) that the Torah was abrogatted!

Why do you think `Isa (as) said: "Do not think that I have come to abolish the Law (Torah, תּוֹרָה) or the Prophets (Nevi'im, נְבִיאִים); I have not come to abolish them but to fulfill them. I tell you the truth, until heaven and earth disappear, not the smallest letter, not the least stroke of a pen, will by any means disappear from the Law; until everything is accomplished. Anyone who breaks one of the least of these commandments and teaches others to do the same will be called least in the kingdom of heaven, but whoever practices and teaches these commands will be called great in the kingdom of heaven. For I tell you that unless your righteousness surpasses that of the Pharisees and the teachers of the Law, you will certainly not enter the Kingdom of Heaven." Matthew 5:17-20

mh nomishte oti hlqon katalusai ton nomon h touV profhtaV: ouk hlqon katalusai alla plhrwsai. amhn gar legw umin, ewV an parelqh o ouranoV kai h gh, iwta en h mia keraia ou mh parelqh apo tou nomou ewV an panta genhtai. oV ean oun lush mian twn entolwn toutwn twn elacistwn kai didaxh outwV touV anqrwpouV, elacistoV klhqhsetai en th basileia twn ouranwn: oV d an poihsh kai didaxh, outoV megaV klhqhsetai en th basileia twn ouranwn. legw gar umin oti ean mh perisseush umwn h dikaiosunh pleion twn grammatewn kai farisaiwn, ou mh eiselqhte eiV thn basileian twn ouranwn.

[QUOTE]Then get a dictionary and look it up. Once again, you are arguing a language you don't even know with someone who does. This is the epidome of folly.

QUOTE
Second, my Jerusalem Bible is very similar. Verse 14 says, "And God said to Moshe, 'EHYEH ASHER EHYEH (I will ever be what I now am): and he said, 'thus shalt thou say to the children of Israel, EHYEH (I AM) has sent to me to you.

Here are two Jewish Bibles that find "I AM" completely acceptable. [/QUOTE]

i only noticed one ISBN number. You said you had two such texts. Please site the second one.

[QUOTE]Those wouldn't happen to be "Messianic Jewish" translations would they?

[Day] Definitely not! [/QUOTE]

You are not being truthfull. i just looked up this "Jerusalem Bible" and it is most certainly Christian. Read the details of this text:

"It was the first translation by Catholic scholars to use the original languages rather than the Latin Vulgate"

So this isn't exactly a Hebrew source now is it?

#17 DKhuluq

DKhuluq

    Member

  • Banned
  • 107 posts

Posted 06 March 2004 - 11:58 PM

day, you got punk'd

#18 Netzari

Netzari

    !האַק מיר נישט קיין טשײַניק

  • Advanced Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 1,514 posts
  • Location:Florida
  • Religion:Jewish/B'nei Noach
  • Interests:G-d. G-d is interesting.

Posted 07 March 2004 - 04:32 AM

day, you got punk'd

Umm, do you even watch that show?

#19 Daystar

Daystar

    Member

  • Advanced Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 4,492 posts

Posted 07 March 2004 - 10:08 PM

[quote name='Naziri' date='Mar 7 2004, 03:50 AM'] [/quote]


What are the ISBN numbers of your Jewish Bibles

[QUOTE][Day] THE NEW JPS TRANSLATION is ISBN# 0-8276-0252-9 (Cloth). My JERUSALEM BIBLE is published BY Koren Publishers in Jerusalem and doesn't have an ISBN. [/QUOTE]

You will notice that on Amazon.com the FIRST reviewer is a Christian. The second says the following: "A readable, but bad translation, August 22, 2000"

[Day] OK, how about the Jerusalem Bible? Also, the Jewish Publication Society Bible of 1917 records "I AM."

This confirms what i have said. It is a BAD translation. "Bad" here meaning "inaccurate."

[Day] That's one reviewers opinion.

and please quote me EXACTLY what they translate "Eheyeh Asher Eheyeh" as?

[Day]
NEW JPS TRANSLATION - Exo. 3:13,14

Moses said to God, "When I come to the Israelites and say to them 'the God of your fathers has sent me to you,' and they ask me, 'What is His Name?' what shall I say to them?" And God said to Moses, "Ehyeh asher Ehyeh." He continued, "Thus shall you say to the Israelites, 'Ehyeh asher Ehyeh sent me to you."

The footnotes below say:
a. Meaning of Heb. uncertain; variously translated: "I AM that I AM, "I will be what I will be."
b. Others, "I AM," or "I will be."
c. the name YHWH (traditionally read Adonai "the LORD) is here associated with the root hayah "to be."

THE JERUSALEM BIBLE - Exo. 3:13,14[/QUOTE]

So again, they WILL NOT put "I AM" as the translation IN THE TEXT. If they were confident in their translation then they could do this. Since they KNOW that this is not the accepted Hebrew definition of the phrase, the will only include the phrase "I AM" in the footnotes.

From the Amazon reviews it seems very clear that they were trying to market to CHRISTIAN theologians,

[Day] BS! (baloney sandwich), Naziri. As the vice gets tighter, you make absurd claims :-)

who the first reviewer CONFIRMS would NORMALLY not know much at all about Hebrew or Jewish translations.

You ALSO notice that the footnote DOES says "I WILL BE." The tenses are different and anyone who knows how to read Hebrew can tell that it is the future, not present tense.

[Day] Hey, I have shown you where two Jewish Bibles do not reject I AM. The Jerusalem Bible even puts "(I AM)" in the text. Will you please write them and straighten them out :-)

Yes Allah DOES have a sense of humor since Josh McDowell had the floor mopped up with himself by Ahmed Deedat in a public debate from what i have heard.

[Day] Well, it was a mop that didn't hold much water. You can read the debate on
http://answering-isl...t_McDowell.html
Also, Mr. Deedat had all he could handle from Anis Shorrosh.

i live in Cincinnati right now, but i'm moving to Southern California again. If your church could pay for a plane ticket (coach is fine), then i would be happy to travel to do this debate.

[Day] I will check with my Pastor about this. I think it would be a great idea. It would attract many Muslims and Christians. (What a harvest :-)

[QUOTE]Think of all the chances you will have to "win hearts for Christ!"

[Day] But not yours? [/QUOTE]

You forget how many years i have spent around Christianity, church, and Christian high school. I've literally heard it all

[Day] And you don't know what it means to be born again? You may have learned alot about Christianity, but you missed its very essence - The Seocnd Birth. For this reason, you don't really understand as much as you think you do. If you would only do what Jesus said: "You must be born again." But you can't be born again unless you believe he died for your sins and rose from the dead.

and left my Christian teachers SPEECHLESS with the challenged and questions i have posed to them about Christianity. If Christianity was the Truth then rest assured i would have been Christian.

[Day] Your not the only one who knows alot about Christianity and never became one. The devil knows more scripture than Christians.

Should you, or anyone, satisfy Christians that Jesus isn't God, I will be the first to burn my Bibles, cancel my church membership, and then GO OUT AND LIVE LIKE THE DEVIL because there will be no judgment since Jesus isn't God.

There is ABSOLUTELY Judgment without ANYONE being God but THE ONE AND ONLY GOD, YHWH, who is Allah ta'ala and NO ONE ELSE.

[Day] "When the Son of Man comes in all his glory....All the nations will be gathered before him, and he will separate the people one from another as a shepherd separates the sheep from the goats. He will put the sheep on his right and the goats on his left...They (goats) will go away to eternal punishment, but the righteous (sheep) to eternal life." (Matt. 25:31,32). My friend, if you are a goat, you will experience the eternal fire. Today, Jesus is the Savior. When he comes, he will be the Judge. "Kiss the Son less he be angry and you be destroyed in your way, for his wrath can flare up in a moment. Blessed are all who take reuge in him." (Ps. 1:12)

[Day] That God is the Father, the Son and the Holy Spirit.[/QUOTE]

Prove it. Respond to my text "The Greatest Story NEVER Told."

[Day] It has not been given that you should know this truth because you refuse the second birth and are only trusting in reason and logic to understand what can only be understood spiritually (John 16:13, Cor. 2:14). You know nothing of the Spirit of God. Only when you are willing to turn from your sins, to Jesus Christ, will he give you the Holy spirit who will "guide you into all truth." Until such time, you will never understand that the incarnation and Trinity can be accepted by faith. This is precisely what Paul ment in 1 Cor. 2:14. He was "born again" on the road to Damascus. Perhaps you will be born again on the way to Southern California :-)

The fact that you cannot accept the simple fact that you are wrong about what "Eheyeh asher Eheyeh" means epidomizes this.

[Day] I do hope you will write to Koren Publishers and correct their error about using (I AM) in their Bible. And then write to the Publisher of the JPS Translation and ask them if they reject I AM as one possibility for hahyah. You can also write the Publisher of the Jewish Publication Society Bible and correct them.

and there are in fact no other witnesses to him supposedly having all of these theologically deviant concepts

[Day] Show me one place where Jesus and Paul disagree.

taught to him by "the ghost of Jesus past" then this is nothing but hearsay and must be disregarded.

[Day] How are you going to show that what Paul said about receiving the gospel from Jesus by revelation, is not true. It's OK for Muhammad to receive revelation, but not the NT authors.

If you want more evidence for why the Worthless Shepherd Paul is unreliable, read:

Paul: Apostle or Apostate?

[Day] I think you are enamoured with your titles :-) They are clever though. Any point about Paul you want to argue, present it here.

[QUOTE]This should be an easy thing if the Bible REALLY says what you and your master Paul claim it says.

[Day] BTW, do you still think Paul wrote Peter? [/QUOTE]

Peter did not write the Books attributed to him. In fact the writing style in the so-called Books of Peter are IDENTICAL to the writing style of Paul. This should not surprise us since the Books praise Paul unceasingly.

[Day] Are you saying that Paul did or did not write Peter? If so, how do you get around 1 Pet. 5:15?

Many scholars think 1 Peter is pseudepigraphic, since "Babylon" (5:13) is not used until after 70 C.E., and since the Greek is much too good for a simple Galilean fisherman.

[Day] It's not clear why Peter used Babylon. But this would hardly suggest that Peter is pseudogarpahical.

Why not? Are you really THAT busy that you can't take the time to read a text that details your opponents arguments against your religion? Aren't you interested in "winning" my "heart for Christ?"

[Day] It's not the time it takes to read it all, but I'm not going to respond to all of it. That would take months. Pick what you want and I will respond to it.

[Day] Just tell me what you would like to talk about. Look ahead. If I respond to your artilces point by point, we will be here for years :-)

Moreover, if you acknowledge that YHWH does not change then why do you preach that He changed from Tanakh to Gospel?

[day] We're talking about his substance and nature, not his name.

This does not mean that because Grace was taught by `Isa (as) that the Torah was abrogatted!

[Day] it most ceratinly does. Why didn't most of the first Jewish Christians practice Mizvot? Some did, but Paul, Silas, Barnabas and Peter taught them what grace was all about. You don't put new wine into old wine skins (Matt. 9:17)

Why do you think `Isa (as) said: "Do not think that I have come to abolish the Law (Torah, תּוֹרָה) or the Prophets (Nevi'im, נְבִיאִים); I have not come to abolish them but to fulfill them. I tell you the truth, until heaven and earth disappear, not the smallest letter, not the least stroke of a pen, will by any means disappear from the Law; until everything is accomplished.

[Day] "UNTIL EVERYTHING IS ACCOMPLISHED." Before Jesus died, he said, "It is finished." that included the Mosaic laws as Paul said (Eph. 2:15).

QUOTE
Second, my Jerusalem Bible is very similar. Verse 14 says, "And God said to Moshe, 'EHYEH ASHER EHYEH (I will ever be what I now am): and he said, 'thus shalt thou say to the children of Israel, EHYEH (I AM) has sent to me to you.

Here are two Jewish Bibles that find "I AM" completely acceptable. [/QUOTE]

i only noticed one ISBN number. You said you had two such texts. Please site the second one.

[Day] You must have missed it. I said the one bible was Published in Jerusalem and does not have an ISBN number.

[QUOTE]Those wouldn't happen to be "Messianic Jewish" translations would they?

[Day] Definitely not! [/QUOTE]

You are not being truthfull. I just looked up this "Jerusalem Bible" and it is most certainly Christian. Read the details of this text:

"It was the first translation by Catholic scholars to use the original languages rather than the Latin Vulgate"

So this isn't exactly a Hebrew source now is it?

[Day] Before you call me a liar, are you sure this is the Jerusalem Bible that is published by Koren Publishers in Jerusalem? The one you seem to be talking about is the Jerusalem Bible as seen at :
http://www.bible-res...alem-bible.html
These are at least two different "Jerusalem Bibles." Mine is very Jewish and was originally called the "Koren Bible."

#20 Daystar

Daystar

    Member

  • Advanced Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 4,492 posts

Posted 07 March 2004 - 10:18 PM

day, you got punk'd

[Day] We'll see :-) Like I'm trying to explain to Naziri, it is impossible to understand the spiritual nature of Christianity. This is why Jews and Muslims don't accept the incarnation and Trinity. You must be "born again." Why won't you believe Jesus? If Jews and Muslims ever get a hold of this, it will revolutionize their thinking. This "born again" thing was foretold in the OT (Jer. 31:31-34 and Ezek. 36:26,27) If you don't want to believe Jesus, then believe the prophets. As Jesus told the two men on the way to Emmaus, "This is what is written: The Christ will suffer and rise from the dead on the third day, and repentance and forgiveness will be preached in his name to ALL nations." (Luke 24:46,47). ALL nations include the Islamic nations, otherwise Jesus didn't know what he was talking about.



Reply to this topic



  


0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users