Look at the picture. Called following the herd.
Nah that is all middle east voodoo crap. My ancestors had many gods. All real.
The existence of Israel = the invalidation of Christianity and Islam
- Thread starter selfsame
- Start date
Look at the picture. Called following the herd.
Nah that is all middle east voodoo crap. My ancestors had many gods. All real.
He could not get a job at a store. He'd steal and eat the rendered pork products.
Satan sits with you today, selfsame. You cannot use the words of Al-Hilly, so you will try to speak badly of God and His word with Satan's guidance. Shame on you!
We see you as the true evil. God will cast you into the fiery pit to burn for your ignorance. Ignore the word of God and be punished! And now, back to Elvis, so that we can make something wholesome from this thread. We reject the lies of Islam, evil one. The world knows the deception and pain of Islam.
Begone, demon!
www.youtube.com/watch?v=RxOBOhRECoo
Satan sits with you today, selfsame. You cannot use the words of Al-Hilly, so you will try to speak badly of God and His word with Satan's guidance. Shame on you!
We see you as the true evil. God will cast you into the fiery pit to burn for your ignorance. Ignore the word of God and be punished! And now, back to Elvis, so that we can make something wholesome from this thread. We reject the lies of Islam, evil one. The world knows the deception and pain of Islam.
Begone, demon!
www.youtube.com/watch?v=RxOBOhRECoo
Last edited:
The Koran is a rendition of the part of the Bible
thet precedes the “prophet” section, as well as a col-
lection of moralizing tales, hymns of praise, and leg-
ends of the Biblical protagonists such as Adam, Cain,
Abraham etc. At the same time, the chronology of
the Koran is often at great odds with the Scaligerian
interpretation of the Biblical chronology. For instance,
the Koran considers Aaron (Arius?) to have been the
uncle of the Evangelical Jesus. Therefore, according
tothe Koran, Moses and Aaron represent the gener-ation that precedes Jesus Christ immediately, which
is several hundred years off the mark from the Scali-
gerian point of view, naturally enough.
This amazing fact is referred to by the 19th Sura
of the Koran ([427], page 239). I. Y. Krachkovsky, a
modern commentator, tells us that it is “the oldest
Sura that contains mentions of such Evangelical char-
acters as Zachariah, John, Mary and Jesus” ([427],
page 560).
The Sura in questions tells us of the birth of Jesus,
son of Mary. The text is as follows: “O Maryam, you
have committed something totally unexpected! O sister of Harun! [Aaron – A. F.]” ([427], Sura 19:28(27)-
29(28); pages 240-241. Modern commentary to this
passage tells us that “the sister of Moses and Aaron is
the mother of Jesus” ([427], page 561, No 17). This
fact, as well as other similar statements made by the
Koran, contradict Scaligerian chronology in the most
explicit manner imaginable. For instance, the Koran
makes the partial identification of Jesus as Joshua,
son of Nun ([544], Volume 6).
All the experts inArabic studies speak in unison of the most remark-
able and amazing fact (from the Scaligerian point of
view) that there are no variations anywhere in the
Koran – even the orthography of its numerous copies
scattered across a vast territory is uniform ([544],
Volume 6). The traditional explanation of this truly
mysterious fact is that the scribes who copied the
Koran had been extremely accurate and cautious so
as to make no mistakes when they copied the text,
since such mistakes were punishable by death. This
is possible. However, we are of the opinion that com-
plete uniformity of different copies is most likely to
indicate that the text of the Koran only became can-
onized after the invention of the printing press, in
the epoch of the XVI-XVII centurya.d.the earliest
– although only handwritten copies are considered
appropriate for officiation. Such copies may have been
made for this purpose locally, printed versions serv-
ing as originals. Since the printed copies that became
distributed over many countries were identical
http://www.bookmasters.com/marktplc/01098vol2_excerpt.pdf
thet precedes the “prophet” section, as well as a col-
lection of moralizing tales, hymns of praise, and leg-
ends of the Biblical protagonists such as Adam, Cain,
Abraham etc. At the same time, the chronology of
the Koran is often at great odds with the Scaligerian
interpretation of the Biblical chronology. For instance,
the Koran considers Aaron (Arius?) to have been the
uncle of the Evangelical Jesus. Therefore, according
tothe Koran, Moses and Aaron represent the gener-ation that precedes Jesus Christ immediately, which
is several hundred years off the mark from the Scali-
gerian point of view, naturally enough.
This amazing fact is referred to by the 19th Sura
of the Koran ([427], page 239). I. Y. Krachkovsky, a
modern commentator, tells us that it is “the oldest
Sura that contains mentions of such Evangelical char-
acters as Zachariah, John, Mary and Jesus” ([427],
page 560).
The Sura in questions tells us of the birth of Jesus,
son of Mary. The text is as follows: “O Maryam, you
have committed something totally unexpected! O sister of Harun! [Aaron – A. F.]” ([427], Sura 19:28(27)-
29(28); pages 240-241. Modern commentary to this
passage tells us that “the sister of Moses and Aaron is
the mother of Jesus” ([427], page 561, No 17). This
fact, as well as other similar statements made by the
Koran, contradict Scaligerian chronology in the most
explicit manner imaginable. For instance, the Koran
makes the partial identification of Jesus as Joshua,
son of Nun ([544], Volume 6).
All the experts inArabic studies speak in unison of the most remark-
able and amazing fact (from the Scaligerian point of
view) that there are no variations anywhere in the
Koran – even the orthography of its numerous copies
scattered across a vast territory is uniform ([544],
Volume 6). The traditional explanation of this truly
mysterious fact is that the scribes who copied the
Koran had been extremely accurate and cautious so
as to make no mistakes when they copied the text,
since such mistakes were punishable by death. This
is possible. However, we are of the opinion that com-
plete uniformity of different copies is most likely to
indicate that the text of the Koran only became can-
onized after the invention of the printing press, in
the epoch of the XVI-XVII centurya.d.the earliest
– although only handwritten copies are considered
appropriate for officiation. Such copies may have been
made for this purpose locally, printed versions serv-
ing as originals. Since the printed copies that became
distributed over many countries were identical
http://www.bookmasters.com/marktplc/01098vol2_excerpt.pdf
Only if you're gullible enough to believe in patented consumer history for serfs. Before vowels came into common use and the reader was treated to literature with unbroken little walls of consonants only, that same reader had the choice of five or six different meanings for every word he thought he had isolated in the mess. Seriously AT Fomenko has never been proven wrong on any of the assertions he makes in this series of books and you have just been included among those whom he's crushed with his brain. Check his credentials and you'll understand how your brief silly opinion aganist his enormous expertise makes out.
The OT means nothing at all since it was compiled by Jesuit Satan worshippers in the fifteenth century to back up the new which preceeded it by two or three generations, none of the supposed originals exist anywhere in the world. Book burning godwhacks fixed history to thier plan for the human race. The oldest extant tome is thought to be no earlier than the 11th century AD. The tradition has been to burn any books not complying with the great god cult and thier authors and or owners along with them.
Israel definition. The name given to Jacob after he wrestled with God.
The word is reserved for those who disobey/envy God.
Last edited:
Are you a mind reader also?? You are right that my version would have been quite new to them.Tid-bits such as the ones praising God in the verse below are Gentiles as they are the people who were taught about the bruise to the head prophecy after the cross was a done deal. (the bruise to the heel prophecy)
M't:26:56:
But all this was done,
that the scriptures of the prophets might be fulfilled.
Then all the disciples forsook him,
and fled.
Zec:13:7-9:
Awake,
O sword,
against my shepherd,
and against the man that is my fellow,
saith the LORD of hosts:
smite the shepherd,
and the sheep shall be scattered:
and I will turn mine hand upon the little ones.
And it shall come to pass,
that in all the land,
saith the LORD,
two parts therein shall be cut off and die;
but the third shall be left therein.
And I will bring the third part through the fire,
and will refine them as silver is refined,
and will try them as gold is tried:
they shall call on my name,
and I will hear them:
I will say,
It is my people:
and they shall say,
The LORD is my God.
When you start showing that the Hebrew language is not the 'pure language' that was spoken up until Babble or that the 10m Commandments will be retired and the Re:21 law will come back into force. They are pretty resistant to those aspects of the book so their version is flawed and they are Scribes without the kind of knowledge they claim to have.
That isn't a flaw in them, it is a credit to how good God is at hiding things from people He doesn't want to know the literal version. They are more likely to accept that the reference to a bruise in Isaiah:53 is a reference to the bruises in Ge:3:15 than you or most Christians are. That isn't a sign of your superior intelligence.
No such thing when you are 'out west'.
I've not been that far back in the west. How much gas do you have to burn on the trails to find them?
The bruise, head and heal has got another similar meaning. It's a ladder each of the four, seven, ten, elementals, I think they are called, the accending one stands on the advancement of the preceeding one headway in the material world, we are built of lower orders, the successful last advancment is redemption. That is my approximation in this case and may or maynot be near or far from what I remember reading. It was a Christian book as I recall.
Tom Laughlin played the character of Billy Jack and in reality he was a martial artist. Interesting side note, his love interest in the movies was in reality his wife and I believe they stayed together until his death at a ripe old age. Corny movie. Bad acting and kinda funny at times but I was a kid on a saturday night lucky to have my big sister and her boyfriend let me go to the drive in. I was just happy to get out of the house and have buttered popcorn and a big coke with lots of ice. The intermission cartoons were always good.
.
Tom Laughlin played the character of Billy Jack and in reality he was a martial artist. Interesting side note, his love interest in the movies was in reality his wife and I believe they stayed together until his death at a ripe old age. Corny movie. Bad acting and kinda funny at times but I was a kid on a saturday night lucky to have my big sister and her boyfriend let me go to the drive in. I was just happy to get out of the house and have buttered popcorn and a big coke with lots of ice. The intermission cartoons were always good.
I'm pleasantly surprized to hear that you were a normal kid at one time.
Haven't I replied to this, but you and many others have not read it?
As regards to the aya in which Mary mother of Jesus, was addressed as the sister of Aaron, and I explained fully about this!?
The similarity of names: names that are loved by people ... like the name of Rachel liked by Jews, Mary liked by Christians and Fatima liked by Muslims.
Yes, I explained fully, but you may have not read that.
So will this be read by somebody?
The sister of Prophet Moses and his brother Prophet Aaron was named Mary or Miriam, who followed the baby floating on the River Nile in his basket until he was picked by the people of Pharaoh, and she suggested to them that a woman (his and her mother) might give him suck.
She was righteous and pious. Jews liked her name (before the coming of Christianity), when such name was liked by Christians and so Jews may have stopped calling their daughters Miriam or Mary.
Then when the mother of Mary (Ann the daughter of Fakod gave birth to the female child she called her with a name that she liked: "Mary" or Miriam like the name of the sister of Moses and Aaron.
I also explained that the Israelites came from Iraq (their father Abraham who is also the father of the Arab of Mecca); and the Israelites retained many customs of the ancient Iraq and the Arab tribes.
One of such customs was to honor their sisters and to boast of being the brother of (the name of his sister), and it was like a slogan to call themselves: "I am the brother of Mary" or the brother of other names of their sisters; and they distinguish their tribes with such slogans like a password among themselves.
So in the aya of the Quran in Soora 19 where Mary's relatives said to her: Sister of Aaron! what is such act that you have committed: while your father and your mother were well-known with their morality and chastity?
That is because Prophet Aaron was a model of piety and righteousness, and therefore, God honored him that the priesthood should be out of his seed.
َQuran 19: 28, which means:
{Sister of Aaron [in righteousness and devotion], your father [Amram] was not any evil man, nor was [Ann] your mother any harlot. o "}
....................................................................
o i.e. she was not adulteress, so that you may become like her.
http://quran-ayat.com/pret/19.htm#a19_28
What does Al Hilly Bull Billy have to say about Alice in Wonderland seeing as how ye all probably take that story literal too ?
Moreover, Mary belonged to the seed of Prophet Aaron: because her father Amram was the Custodian of the House of God at Jerusalem, and the priest should be of the seed of Aaron.
To the Arab tribes and in the Arab language, they call the man belonging to a certain tribe as the brother of that tribe, like many ayat of the Quran; e.g. the aya in the Quran 7: 65, which means:
{And to [the tribe of] Aad [We sent] Hood their brother }
And the Quran 7: 73, which means:
(And to [the tribe of] Thamood [We sent] their brother Salih)
And there are many ayat of the Quran where God says that He sent to such tribe their brother: such prophet.
=====================================================================
While about the Quran and claiming there was a change of the font style: yes the font changed but the text did not change.
The Quran is preserved like you know a poem by heart without reading it in paper; so that if anyone makes a mistake with a word or so, there will be many who correct the mistake without referring to the paper.
The change that occurred in font made it more clear: it was without punctuation and it then was punctuated to make it more clear to people, while the text is the same.
Moreover, the writer from whom DB quoted: he said: the Quran did not suffer changes because people were afraid of death penalty ... so I will not discuss this claim ... but he anyhow admitted that the Quran was not inflicted by changes or alterations.
While the Torah suffered tremendous changes (touching the basic beliefs and statements) when the original Torah was torn up by Nabuchodonosor and then it was re-written by the priest Ezra son of Siraeh, while the Gospel is obviously defective and consists of 4 gospels with differences between them.
And see this link where the interpreter of the Quran and the Bible, Mohammed-Ali Hassan Al-Hilly says:
"Actually I have studied the present Torah (or Hebrew Bible), the Gospel, the Psalms and the Quran: to realize that the first three books have been somewhat manipulated by the hands of men, so that they altered some of their statements and distorted the truth. Therefore, from now on we cannot rely on them.
For this reason, anyone who seeks after the truth should hold fast with the Quran which no falsehood may affect whether beforehand or afterwards; it is the revelation from a Wise and Praiseworthy (God.)"
The Conflict between the Torah and the Quran
To the Arab tribes and in the Arab language, they call the man belonging to a certain tribe as the brother of that tribe, like many ayat of the Quran; e.g. the aya in the Quran 7: 65, which means:
{And to [the tribe of] Aad [We sent] Hood their brother }
And the Quran 7: 73, which means:
(And to [the tribe of] Thamood [We sent] their brother Salih)
And there are many ayat of the Quran where God says that He sent to such tribe their brother: such prophet.
=====================================================================
While about the Quran and claiming there was a change of the font style: yes the font changed but the text did not change.
The Quran is preserved like you know a poem by heart without reading it in paper; so that if anyone makes a mistake with a word or so, there will be many who correct the mistake without referring to the paper.
The change that occurred in font made it more clear: it was without punctuation and it then was punctuated to make it more clear to people, while the text is the same.
Moreover, the writer from whom DB quoted: he said: the Quran did not suffer changes because people were afraid of death penalty ... so I will not discuss this claim ... but he anyhow admitted that the Quran was not inflicted by changes or alterations.
While the Torah suffered tremendous changes (touching the basic beliefs and statements) when the original Torah was torn up by Nabuchodonosor and then it was re-written by the priest Ezra son of Siraeh, while the Gospel is obviously defective and consists of 4 gospels with differences between them.
And see this link where the interpreter of the Quran and the Bible, Mohammed-Ali Hassan Al-Hilly says:
"Actually I have studied the present Torah (or Hebrew Bible), the Gospel, the Psalms and the Quran: to realize that the first three books have been somewhat manipulated by the hands of men, so that they altered some of their statements and distorted the truth. Therefore, from now on we cannot rely on them.
For this reason, anyone who seeks after the truth should hold fast with the Quran which no falsehood may affect whether beforehand or afterwards; it is the revelation from a Wise and Praiseworthy (God.)"
The Conflict between the Torah and the Quran
That's not the way things work. It's up to Fomenko to make his case to the academic and scientific communities, it's not up to them to disprove his claims. I'd never heard of him before your mention of him, I had to look him up, and spent an interesting 90 minutes or so cruising through several discussions of him and his works. It's clear that he hasn't made his case to anyone but the foolish and gullible, and there's lots of perfectly sound criticism of his ideas. You do realize, don't you, that if Fomenko is right then another of the pseudosciences you admire, Velikovsky's catastrophism, must be wrong, and vice versa? You must spend a lot of time in a state of serious cognitive dissonance.
No, but some things are perfectly obvious.
So what happens when someone starts showing those things? You've got "When someone starts showing X or Y and Z," you need a clause beginning with "then" to finish that.
And do you suppose you're one of the people god wants to know the literal version?
Agreed. A sign of my superior intelligence is that I understand that most of what you write is complete nonsense, and you don't.
About 10 gallons if you are in Edmonton as you have to drive until there are no more overpasses and then keep going till there are no more fences and when you run out of gas you are there, about as far back in time as that will get you. Once you start talking to the locals that might be extended if they think a city is wide and flat.I've not been that far back in the west. How much gas do you have to burn on the trails to find them?
The bruise, head and heal has got another similar meaning. It's a ladder each of the four, seven, ten, elementals, I think they are called, the accending one stands on the advancement of the preceeding one headway in the material world, we are built of lower orders, the successful last advancment is redemption. That is my approximation in this case and may or maynot be near or far from what I remember reading. It was a Christian book as I recall.
It could have many meanings if it was a parable. The story of the Rich Man and the Beggar Lazarus could be a parable also but since it is not specifically called a parable one shouldn't make it one as it also works as a prophecy if Jews are the Rich Man and the sleeping Jew is waiting for the common resurrection that will bring both people out of death at the same time. The day Re:20:4 is fulfilled. The Rich Man is symbolic of the ones that heard the sermon from Matthew:23 as they would be the Jews to see hell if that was possible. It is possible during the 5th and 6th trumps and they cover a 3 1/2 year period to the day.
We are said to become as perfect as God is, that does not happen by reading a book. What the book does is give the steps that will be taken before we become as wise as God is. Step on, live as a flesh and blood person for 120 years and in that time you will become a master at emotions. After that you will live as an immortal for about 360M years before you enter the place that God has been in for about 360B years. At that time we will be as smart as God is today. He is learning every day and His teacher would be equal to His two parents. Two of the 4 beasts standing around the throne in Re:4. The other two are the parents of the Holy Spirit. That is the path we are on only our journey has just began.
If your version was the valid one then the explanations in the Bible about visions would have to be something other than literal and none of them read like it. The first question to arise should be, 'Is Re:12 and expansion of Ge:3:15?' and the argument that it is and it is intentional is a point that has to be considered when the overall quality of the book is examined. By rights there should be no relationship let alone all the ones that Revelations has that add the last detail to OT prophecies and puts them in the proper sequence. Without that step being taken the book doesn't reveal very much at all. It still boils down to a literal version means God is more about action than words. If you are going to consider it you might as well understand what the book is about in those terms.
Since both of you are readers rather than authors perhaps you should be mentioning some specific points rather than rating him overall. A critical thinker should have a list of things they agree with and a list of things the disagree with by the time you have read the entire document/book. Till that happens it isn't really a way to advance knowledge. If the Bible is looked at as being in bits and pieces that is because those steps were needed to keep the writers from figuring out the context of the whole book. Using 40 Companies to design and build a machine that has 40 different components is the best way to keep the final design a 'secret' until a pre-determined time. Now apply that to the whole book. What you end up with is a book about literal events over periods of time.
Period of time before Moses is based on Adam and Eve and their seed that shows that Moses and the 12 Tribes would be the 'seed of Eve' that would the focus of the two bruises determined in Ge:3:15. Those have to be manifested before reconciliation can take place.
The first woman in Re:12 is Eve as she died and her breath of life returned to God. The 12 stars are the 12 men that are the oldest lived in the Bible. They were resurrected on the same morning as Jesus and they ascended to heaven and are now the 24 elders in Re:4 (12 men and 12 wives as Adam and Eve were created as being 1 living souls) The pain mentioned is also specific to Eve as she would have witnessed many of her children die before she did. The next woman in Re:12 is Mary, mother of Jesus and her heritage goes back to Adam as it is detailed in the Gospel of Luke. She was a daughter of Aaron, Moses's brother, Miriam was the sister of both of them. The event being covered is the cross in particular. The war was fought between Holy Angels and fallen Angels during the time of the flood.
The prophecy by Enoch and mentioned in Jude about 10,000 Saints is about Holy Angels and when Moses mentions them it is a past event. The giants alive after the flood were the offspring of fallen angels rather than being fallen angels themselves. They were permitted to live until it was time for the 10 Commandments become the law for the time it takes for the two bruises to be completed, no more and no less.
If you want the symbolic part it is in the offerings that Cain and Able brought. God accepted the one that was appropriate for a world that was in sin. That sacrifice included Jesus as the last blood sacrifice. Today wine and unleavened bread takes its place and the sacrifice left on the alter in the Temple during the 1,000 year reign will be the one brought by Cain. Grain. The sacrifice that will be acceptable for the new earth period that will follow will be the same. (brought by people under the age of 120 years.)
I know you don't have a version of the literal version so you have decided one doesn't exist or you would have come across it by now. I already have it figured out past what our posts mention so progress in that area isn't dependent on your posts. You would have to read mine to even know what the literal version promotes, which you don't at present. That starts will going over who God is by using the first and last 3 books of the Bible as the 'foundation' and summation of where we came from and where we are going, . . . and who is driving the bus.
You should be able to formulate some rational argument then, so far you have passed on every opportunity, even the one about who is praising God just above. Running away from the various new points is not the best way to get me to respect your superior 'opinion', rather than knowledge as befits the term 'theology'. Your argument that a literal version can't exist is flawed because that is the version I have after doing a considerable amount of reading and a considerable amount of debating (unlike what our chats are like) that allowed my version to be fine tuned in that it takes all the text and applies it to a few possible outcomes and we have to sort it into 1 of 3 piles. Not an impossible task as I found out and the version is a lot more interesting and dramatic than yours.
An example is the names of a few women are mentioned as being followers instead of their names being mentioned in relation to the sin they committed. The Bible's version is kinder to their place in 'history' because of that.
Ancient Aliens with the sound down would be a good primer for who the 'sons of God' were back in the time before the flood. The cities that Adam and Eve's children should have inherited were made into ruins because of the sins that caused the flood in the first place. Had the fallen angels not tried to exterminate 5 fingered people they could still have been around today and until the day the 7th trump sounds. Another point the literal version has is that it reads like a modern soap opera. Attention to 'minute details' is also a trademark of the Bible.
Need I say that if the text is missing from the posts then it is basically idle chatter as far as looking at solutions to questions?