This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.
Messages - DLH
1
« on: December 01, 2025, 08:36:47 AM »
Surely someone as fluent and versed in Hebrew as you are knows that the word "Elohim" is not the only Hebrew word for "God". We have YHVH, and Adonai, and Shaddai, and Tzevaot, and Ehyeh. And that doesn't even take into account the poetic names. But you knew all this, right? No. Like I said, I'm not particularly conversant in Jewish and Christian traditions, which came about after the Bible, the subject of my own interest. YHVH isn't a Hebrew word for God, it's the personal name for a specific God. Adonai is a word meaning lord, not God. Though, you see the difficulty here is that you may disagree because of tradition. To you YHVH is God, and Lord. Shaddai is also not a word for God but a word meaning almighty. At Genesis 17:1 the Hebrew says El Shaddai, which means God almighty, not God God. In Western culture the atheist take on God is almost exclusively a parody of the theistic - specifically Abrahamic - "sky daddy." The stereotypical magic supernatural creator. They don't see a god as Amaterasu, or Zeus. I don't know what this means either.
It means that in western culture the word God is typically limited according to Abrahamic traditions. For certain, the word "Elohim" can refer to human beings. See Exodus 7:1 for example. I do not agree that a human being is or can be God, or even a god.
Uhh are a Christian?
What? Am I a Christian? No. I say that because I don't adhere to the "Christian" doctrine or creed, most of which actually comes from pagan sources and were only introduced only about 400 years after Christ. With, as I've said, Constantine like with the Jews, Alexander. I don't know what "mortal god" means.
It means a god or God that is mortal. Zeus, the Japanese Royal family, Kim Jong-Un, Eric Clapton, Frodo Baggins, Moses, the judges of Israel, Jesus. Given that, how, then, can your tradition, which I assume is Jewish, reconcile that a human can't be a god?
Because no place in Judaism do we have a human god. Like your screed on Gen 1, you just made up a term.
I did? Hmmm. Let's see, who said Elohim means god(s) and at Psalm 82:1? Your tradition doesn't see this as Jehovah God almighty referring to the judges of Israel, mortal men, as gods i.e. mighty?
2
« on: November 10, 2025, 12:33:44 PM »
The Hebrew term remes means to creep or move about; an aimless movement. It doesn't mean "an aimless movement". It means "to creep" or "to swarm".
A rose by any other name. Tradition, huh? Go figure. [Genesis 1:24] Cattle; domestic or tame animal (Hebrew behemah). Yes, that's what it means.
Well, that's odd. [Genesis 1:26] God refers to his son, Christ Jesus in his heavenly pre-human existence. Not what it says.
I know. You think you have a monopoly on Hebrew. What does it mean? [Genesis 1:27] Too often it is overlooked by selfish, dominating men that woman too were created in Gods image, and thus deserving respect. Too often it is overlooked by selfish, dominating people that all humans are created in the image of God, and thus deserving of respect.
Oh goy . . .
3
« on: November 10, 2025, 11:24:58 AM »
The Hebrew nephesh and the Greek psykhe are the Biblical terms translated into soul. The Hebrew word comes from a root that literally means "breather."
I already told you, the Hebrew word you're looking for is "Neshama".
What is the "soul?"
4
« on: November 10, 2025, 11:23:58 AM »
Do you get bored of posting these over and over again on different forums?
No. Would you have known they existed had I not? Looking for source or material. Ego or substance. Your call. I think I already know where this is going. In fact I announced it introductory. Stupid same. Nothing, as Solomon said, under the sun is new.
5
« on: November 10, 2025, 11:12:16 AM »
[Genesis 1:14] The light in verse 14 is different from that in verse 3. In verse 3 the Hebrew word ohr is used, meaning the light from the source. Light in a general sense, whereas the light in verse 14 the Hebrew word maohr is used, signifying the source of the light is now visible. Ah, finally, an actual good translation of the text. Yes, in verse 3 God creates light, and in verse 14, He places sources of light in the sky.
Hmm. I'm not sure that is nuanced the same as I nuanced it. I have it that the source of light, the luminaries, were all complete in Genesis 1:1. As the heavens and earth. Later they were arranged, appointed, as originally purposed. The light penetrates the swaddling band and later the source is visible. The progressive language indicates a work in progress. [Genesis 1:16] The Hebrew waiyaas (proceeded to make), from asah, in verse 16 is different than bara (create) in verses 1, 21 and 27. Asah is the imperfect state indicating progressive action. Not what the words mean. Furthermore, in Gen 2:2, the text says that "On the seventh day, God completed the work that He did", it uses the word "Asah". Using your definition, it would mean that God finished the "progressive action" (whatever that it) on the seventh day.
You mean that he proceeded to rest? Wai‧yish‧both. You see, this goes further into the Greek with the Christian texts which may not be significantly relevant to you. Uh . . . I don't want a time consuming detailed explanation but let me just see if the following can help. Maybe you are familiar with. Well, I mean inasmuch as it differs from your own tradition. The number 6 is incomplete. 7 is complete, 6 is incomplete. That is why 666, Greek 006, 060, 600 is the number of man. It's incompleteness stressed three times. So, God . . . you know I have a post I was working on . . . I will link it here. It explains this in more detail. I have to post it yet though. Anyway, God created the heavens and earth. Adam and Eve were perfect. Like a newborn is perfect. Not unlike myself it is chubby, bald, toothless, can't talk, walk, go to the bathroom. Perfect. Meaning innocent and having great potential. He will be complete when he enters God's rest. The seventh day. So, yeah, he was finished up to that point. But as Jesus said, their work continued. They were not tired and in need of rest. The rest was a period of time in which mankind was allowed, like the angels before them, to mature. Complete. Then the work will be complete. In other words the seventh day continues to this day and who knows how much longer. ( John 5:16- 17; Isaiah 40:28) [Genesis 1:20] The word soul, from the Hebrew nephesh, means "breather." That's not what the word means.
[Sigh] Why?! Why must you question me? Nephsh comes from a root word, naphash that means breather. It can mean "soul" or it can mean "to refresh". A different Hebrew word, "Neshama" means "breath". See gen 2:7.
Yeah. That's what I said. I'm going to post something on the soul today, or soon. Not the immortal soul of Greek philosophy but of the Bible. I would edit a link to it if I could remember and find this reference. Let's just do it now, huh? Here
6
« on: November 10, 2025, 11:11:02 AM »
Removed by Athanasius. Reason: Low effort copy pasta.
7
« on: November 10, 2025, 11:03:36 AM »
Removed by Athanasius. Reason: Low effort copy pasta.
8
« on: November 10, 2025, 10:19:42 AM »
I think that you will find that nobody here is interested in what the Hebrew says. Believe me, I've tried.
It would be the first time for me if they did. The Hebrew, Aramaic, Greek or Latin. Such is life. We all, as they say, have our filthy idol to carry.
9
« on: November 10, 2025, 10:17:48 AM »
I apologize for the delay, Fenris. I actually started to respond to this first but due to it's difficulty got bored and distracted by the more simple and less time consuming tasks elsewhere. You know what I mean. Unfortunately not what the Hebrew means.
Not what the Hebrew means.
Not what the Hebrew means.
Not what the Hebrew means.
Not what the Hebrew means.
Not what the Hebrew means.
Not what the Hebrew means.
Not what the Hebrew means.
Not what the Hebrew means.
Not what the Hebrew means.
Could you elaborate on your already exhaustive criticism? Maybe. I don't know. Tell us what you, or more likely, your tradition prescribes as the meaning?
10
« on: November 10, 2025, 10:10:40 AM »
I’ll see your haiku and raise you a doggerel and a limerick
An attempt at a doggerel...
Buzzing up high in the sun's hazy glare,
Aristaeus darts swiftly through shimmering air.
He hums as he goes,
Inspecting each rose --
A busy bee with not a moment to spare!
And a limerick, too --
Aristaeus was humming with glee,
As he buzzed through the warm summer breeze.
With a drone in the air,
He worked hard everywhere --
Such a tirelessly busy young bee!
[Sigh] Are you two finished? What is being proposed here? [Slams fist on desk] Are you proposing this . . . this . . . mythological culture hero as a god?! That doesn't fit the category I insist upon?!
11
« on: November 10, 2025, 10:06:16 AM »
The the that gets to define right is deity.
Okay, I think I know what you mean. A god calls the shots by appointment, whether supernatural, natural, political, familial, financial, etc. Is that what you mean. If so I agree.
12
« on: November 10, 2025, 09:56:49 AM »
Morally wrong? Factually wrong? Some other kind of wrong?
Correct. It would be none of those things. Because I'd imagine if theism is true, then one would be factually wrong to hold to atheism. If atheism is true, then one would be factually wrong to hold to theism.
I'll say it again. Theism means with gods and atheism means without gods. Neither of those are wrong. That would be like saying love or hate were right or wrong. Either you have one or the other. Theism, in other words, isn't dependent upon the actual existence of the deity. A god doesn't have to literally exist. Also, if you think you are atheist - or non-theist if you insist - you just don't know what a god is. It isn't that you don't have any it's that you think you don't have any because you don't know what one is. I can give you some examples of all of this. Shinto, for example, has become such a part of Japanese society that people don't even know that they are practicing it. The Shinto gods may or may not exist. For example the Royal family are gods. Deities. Divine. They conscripted the Nihongi and Kojiki in order to instruct Japanese youth. The gods, like the Goddess Amaterasu I mentioned earlier somewhere, wasn't thought to be or introduced as literally existing. Nor were any of the others. Remember, a god is simply someone or something which is of supreme importance to the individual or group (each individual of a collective). Paul mentions that to some their God is "their belly," meaning food. To others it could be money. Or school. Or sex, drugs, politics, anything. Anyone. God or Trump. Japanese Royal family or Pharaoh, Zeus (Roman senate or mythological person), Kim Jong-Un, Eric Clapton, etc. Whether the epistemic question can be answered is a different question, and so one could sincerely hold to atheism just as one could sincerely hold to theism. In this sense, neither is morally wrong, but of course, this is a simplification.
Perhaps just ignorance or ideology, though, as well. It is simple. The epistemologist may not want you to think so and the atheist and theist with ideological fixation may not, but, well, that doesn't mean much. Buddhism is non-theistic because (1) it describes no creator God and (2) isn't monotheistic. Buddhism proposes supernatural beings regardless, such as yidams, devas, asuras, nagas, etc. Well, what were you saying earlier about anything being a God so much as it is "mighty"?
That it could be supernatural or natural? Not that I disagree with your facts on Buddhism I just disagree with your conclusion regarding theism. Monotheism, henotheism, atheism, polytheism, has nothing to do with Buddhism. Their consideration of supernatural beings doesn't change that in any way. A god doesn't have to be supernatural and the supernatural doesn't have to be gods or God. Supernatural doesn't mean god. God means respect. Worship. Veneration. I'm not sure why you're conflating 'gods' with 'God(s)'.
Think of it like Lord or King. Charles is a king. Charles isn't my king. He is King of the brits. Jehovah is my King, Lord, God. Jehovah is a god. Not your God. The businessman who treats money as his god isn't doing so in a theistic way, such that theism or theism would apply.
This is what I meant when I said occidental culture projecting the Abrahamic theistic concept universally. You think of religious tradition as being worship. Buddhist, Confucianist, Taoist ritual don't involve gods but that doesn't mean they aren't religious. Religious means significant, repetition. You do something religiously doesn't mean you do it in church or temple. If you do laundry religiously that doesn't mean you pray, dance, sing, etc. The business man respects money more than life, family, etc. That is what religion or worship or veneration is. Not just a specific set of rituals occidental culture is familiar with. Not just Christian or Jewish. Of course, here, 'god' has a peculiar meaning.
No it doesn't. God or god only has one meaning. It's just applied to different examples. Jehovah and Jesus and Kim Jong-Un are all gods. God is only a reverential capitalization. To one person Jehovah is God to another person Brahman. This can also be utilized out of ignorance in a cultural sense. For example, someone in one of the specific cultures involved with those deities may be ignorant of any other. It's not helpful for you to confuse the mighty being with the thing around which a person organises their life.
Which mighty being? Jehovah? If no one worshipped Jehovah then Jehovah would no longer be God or a god. The organization of their life is the primary point there. God isn't a name, it's a title or category of bieng.
13
« on: November 10, 2025, 03:37:46 AM »
In every language ever known to man, in every time, every God had only one thing in common. One meaning. Mighty. Venerated. It doesn't matter if the god is mortal or immortal, fictional, or literal, supernatural or natural, good or evil, living or dead. It most only be, mighty and venerated.
That's not true.
Show me.
14
« on: November 09, 2025, 11:13:16 PM »
There are many other Hebrew words to denote "God" that do not use this form however.
Not sure what you mean by that. Are you talking about names and descriptions? Like elohim, Michael, Elijah? Perhaps that is due to the common occidental theistic and atheistic practice of exclusive devotion to the Abrahamic concept. I don't know what this means.
In Western culture the atheist take on God is almost exclusively a parody of the theistic - specifically Abrahamic - "sky daddy." The stereotypical magic supernatural creator. They don't see a god as Amaterasu, or Zeus. For certain, the word "Elohim" can refer to human beings. See Exodus 7:1 for example. I do not agree that a human being is or can be God, or even a god.
The thing about me is that I know very little about modern day Jewish and Christian tradition. People think of those traditions as being scriptural but I don't. So, I don't see Exodus 7:1 where Jehovah makes Moses a god to Pharaoh as a problem or contradiction to the idea of human gods. Pharaohs were mortal gods. Moses was a mortal God. Jesus. The judges of Israel. Given that, how, then, can your tradition, which I assume is Jewish, reconcile that a human can't be a god?
15
« on: November 09, 2025, 11:03:10 PM »
“When I use a word,’ Humpty Dumpty said in rather a scornful tone, ‘it means just what I choose it to mean — neither more nor less.’
Etymology isn't ontology; otherwise, 'nice' would still mean 'ignorant' and butterflies would be dairy products.
In every language ever known to man, in every time, every God had only one thing in common. One meaning. Mighty. Venerated. It doesn't matter if the god is mortal or immortal, fictional, or literal, supernatural or natural, good or evil, living or dead. It most only be, mighty and venerated.
|
Watcha doing?
by Athanasius
Today at 03:34:11 AM
|
Genesis 1:1
by IMINXTC
October 07, 2026, 06:06:18 PM
|
Put me on your prayer list
by Cloudwalker
October 04, 2026, 06:35:39 PM
|
Earthquake statistics
by IMINXTC
October 04, 2026, 12:40:38 AM
|
The fallen tent of David.
by Fenris
September 23, 2026, 04:26:01 PM
|
How far back does the Protestant split with Catholicism go?
by Fenris
September 22, 2026, 12:34:26 PM
|
Is Teaching People How to Evangelize Heresy?
by RabbiKnife
September 10, 2026, 08:03:33 AM
|
Its clear in the Bible, you do not go to Heaven or to Hell, when you die.
by Fenris
August 26, 2026, 12:26:37 PM
|
Silly
by RabbiKnife
August 26, 2026, 10:48:10 AM
|
Does God manifest His love in the animal world too?
by Athanasius
August 17, 2026, 12:33:28 PM
|
Have people rightly understood the primary doctrine on Father, Son & Holy Ghost?
by RabbiKnife
August 17, 2026, 06:14:15 AM
|
Understanding what Christ is doing in Heaven at this time.
by IMINXTC
August 14, 2026, 12:03:07 PM
|
Do you know then God of Jesus?
by Athanasius
August 14, 2026, 06:02:07 AM
|
Glorified body
by RabbiKnife
August 14, 2026, 05:22:11 AM
|
The Jews will be kept safe in the Great Tribulation
by Fenris
August 12, 2026, 01:42:00 PM
|
What is Faith?
by Fenris
August 09, 2026, 12:49:58 PM
|
Doctrine of Original Sin
by Fenris
August 06, 2026, 06:42:45 PM
|
Do You Know How to be Saved?
by Fenris
August 06, 2026, 05:56:09 PM
|
Looking at Col. 2:16
by Richard Aberdeen
August 06, 2026, 05:19:32 PM
|
Can the law grant eternal life?
by Richard Aberdeen
August 06, 2026, 05:14:31 PM
|
|
|
Show Posts
